Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Brief Attacks Free Software Foundation
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA has requested permission to file a response to the amicus curiae brief filed by the Free Software Foundation in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum, the Boston case against a Boston University grad student accused of having downloaded some song files when in his teens. In their proposed response, the RIAA lawyers personally attacked The Free Software Foundation, Ray Beckerman (NewYorkCountryLawyer), and NYCL's blog, 'Recording Industry vs. The People.' The 9-page response (PDF) — 4 pages longer than the document to which it was responding — termed the FSF an organization 'dedicated to eliminating restrictions on copying, redistribution, and modifying computer programs,' and accused the FSF of having an 'open and virulent bias against copyrights' and 'blatant bias' against the record companies. They called 'Recording Industry vs. The People' an 'anti-recording industry web site' and stated that NYCL 'is currently subject to a pending sanctions motion for his conduct in representing a defendant' (without disclosing that plaintiffs' lawyers were 'subject to a pending motion for Rule 11 sanctions for their conduct in representing plaintiffs' in that very case)."
Probably because they keep losing. If they make themselves loud enough in the courts, a judge is bound to find something he agrees with and rule in their favor. They're grandstanding to win.
You say that as if it's a bad thing.
The FSF's centerpiece, the GPL, depends wholly on copyright for enforcement.
So saying that the FSF has an "open and virulent bias against copyrights" clearly demonstrates either a lack of research, a lack of understanding, or a lack of honesty on the part of the RIAA's lawyers.
Targeting lawyers instead of, say, people who don't even know how to defend is "getting better at picking targets" when it comes to law suits that are not far from simple harrassment?
Dunno if I can follow your train of thought.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If you can't innovate, litigate.
If you can't litigate, legislate.
I would say that the aspersions cast concerning Beckerman and the "pending sanctions motion" would be inaccurate. If I were in a lawsuit, I could potentially move to have sanctions entered against my opponent for various miscellaneous reasons, such as making out with the court reporter while the judge's back was turned, etc., regardless of whether any of those things were true or not. For the two seconds it would take the judge to deny my motion, that motion would be pending. At that very moment, someone could file a brief in another court involving the person who is my opponent in my case, stating that there is a pending sanctions motion against that person.
In Beckerman's case, while the motion isn't based on pure ridiculousness as in my straw man above, it's still based solely on allegations made by the RIAA against Beckerman with no consideration of any evidence.
While the assertion may not be "incorrect", as there is a pending sanctions motion against Beckerman, the fact that the RIAA frames it as a reason to discredit Beckerman makes it inaccurate.
It is not the neo-cons that we have to worry about. It is which oligarchs have the reins of which legislators and judges. It is beginning to look like the oligarchs that control the Obama group are going to take our intellectual and cultural freedoms from us, rather than our constitutional freedoms.
No incumbents, not no where, not no how.
Vote them out every term.
And then in the very next sentence:
I mean... unless something has changed in their pattern, they only have documentation of one legal download and that being from an investigation team that may or may not be licensed.
Why has no attorney ever taken a look at the finances and circumstances associated with one particular song - how much revenue did this earn in the year prior, the year during, and the year after the alleged infringement. Most of the songs that I've noted have been out for at least a decade if not two, with little or no marketing, and zero spins on any of the radio stations I listen to.
Another argument I never see in any of these is the challenge the RIAAs ownership of the material. A 20 year old song may or may not have a clear ownership record, and with the history of the industry, you really should establish that the recording artists, the producers, and the songwriters all have given the RIAA authority willingly and contractually prior to the filing of any individual lawsuit.
There's always some dastardly evildoers trying to steal our freedoms, nowadays, isn't there. If it's not the extremists it's the communists, or the democrats, or the republicans or the liberals, or the PC brigade with all their health and safety mumbo jumbo, coming to take away our precious, precious freedoms (it's our freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeedommmmms, preeeeeeeeeeeeeeecious). As we stare at this wonderous package of glory. Our freedoms, which we have, and those ever growing hordes of zealots - from one side of the political spectrum or another (depending on our own beliefs) - coming to rip it from our hands and hurl it in to the volcanoes of Mordor or something. Or freedoms! Please! Won't someone think of the freedoms!
It's certainly an emotive issue.
And if people actually did care then maybe they'd stop slinging shit into the eyes of fabricated enemies for 15 seconds and realise that there is a middle ground in which you can actually work together and not just boil it down to some pitiful good/evil pantomime.
Democrats and Republicans both hate the constitution; they just hate different parts of it (1st amendment & 2nd amendment for example).
Support Right To Repair Legislation.