Prof. Nesson Ordered To Show Cause

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Professor Charles Nesson, the Harvard law professor serving pro bono as counsel to the defendant in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum, has been ordered to show cause why sanctions should not be issued against him for violating the Court's orders prohibiting reproduction of the court proceedings. The order to show cause was in furtherance of the RIAA's motion for sanctions and protective order, which we discussed here yesterday. The Judge indicated that she was 'deeply concerned' about Prof. Nesson's apparent 'blatant disregard' of her order."

Comments

Too much detail

[whiledo]

Do we really need so many status updates on the day-to-day goings-on in all the RIAA trials and scandals. Isn't this why NYCL has a blog? The posting of this minutae is actually making me care less about fighting the RIAA. Considering how much I dislike them, that's a pity.

I don't blame NYCL (and others) for submitting them (hey, most people are pretty narrowly focused on their own hobbies), but surely the editors can find something else in the pile of submissions that would be even slightly more interesting.

Re:Too much detail

[ground.zero.612]

I have no mod points but I'd like to see a +5 Redundant for the rest of this guys whines in this thread.

Re:Too much detail

[causality]

It's funny how you don't follow your own logic - no one forced you to read any of my posts. And yet apparently you've read many. And you needed to post to complain about them. This same urge is what led me to complain about the story. It's pretty common human nature. Not going to put you down for it, but I hope you realize that you've displayed the same mentality.

There's one thing critical to this discussion, so far as it concerns me, that you are missing. I was not complaining. I was telling you what I believe to be the truth of the matter, the actual underlying thing behind the otherwise superficial and uninteresting subject of whether or not you are enjoying Slashdot's editorial decisions.

I was trying to make you aware of something that I consider to be far more important than which story Slashdot decides to put on the front page. That's because I don't think Slashdot's editorial decisions have much of an impact on your well-being. However, I have never seen that entitlement mentality displayed by a happy person whose attitude towards life can be described as "joyous." Occasionally I encounter people who aren't satisfied with that and are grateful to learn that the decisions they make can change it. I am perceptive but I am not a mind-reader, so I don't know if you are such a person until after I try and show you what you are doing.

So, I am following my own logic. It just wasn't the logic you were expecting. I did tell you what that logic was, however. To quote myself:

Now I will tell you one occurrence that is extremely rare, as in it nearly never happens: pointing out to someone in a non-inflammatory, reasonable way that they are displaying an entitlement mentality, and then having them appreciate it and understand that there are more graceful ways. I'm betting you won't appreciate this, but what the hell, thought I'd give it a shot.

If you think I have something to gain by deceiving you, then I celebrate your right to go on believing that I am a hypocrite who is obtuse enough to complain about your complaining as you have indicated. If someone wanted to take that right away from you, I would be against that person and would explain to them why they are wrong for wanting to do so. That's easy for me, however, because whether you see my point or not is entirely your gain or your loss. The people who need you to agree with them are not coming from a position that could possibly hope to show you much of anything that you didn't already see yourself.

Re:Too much detail

[whiledo]

Oh, I agree the issue is major, but won't that issue be decided when the judge rules and not be this order?

That's what I mean. If this had been a story about the ruling, I wouldn't have complained. But this boils down to "the judge is thinking about doing something but hasn't done it yet."

Re:Hey AC Troll

[sbeckstead]

No, you may go too!

Re:I'm deeply concerned

[macraig]

If you change that to Right Said Fred, then you can finally say you have some real non-imaginary friends.

Re:cut the frickin guy some slack, he has a point

[S7urm]

You're not proving your point. Just give it up. Some people want to read this -- me for instance. Complain to the site admins, not the site readers. You've thrown this discussion way off course. I saw you claim "If you don't like what I've written, don't complain to me, lest you're a hypocrite." Well, honestly, how can anyone NOT read your crap seeing that you've taken up 3/4 of the god damn discussion. Suddenly this entire topic became about YOU and YOU alone.

you mean kinda like the frontpage of Slashdot has become about the RIAA, and the RIAA alone?

Re:cut the frickin guy some slack, he has a point

[Starlon]

Don't be so absolutely ridiculous.

Re:cut the frickin guy some slack, he has a point

[S7urm]

Don't be so absolutely ridiculous.

you're ridiculous

shall we venture further into childishness or can we stop now?

Re:cut the frickin guy some slack, he has a point

[Starlon]

So you're blaming your shortcoming on others? That's a fair discussion.