Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Prof. Nesson Ordered To Show Cause

Posted by kdawson on from the does-not-sound-good dept.

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."

6 of 267 comments (clear)

  1. Hey RIAA shill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    you can't fool slashdot

  2. Re:Too much detail by whiledo · · Score: -1, Troll

    Do we really need so many status updates on the day-to-day goings-on in all the RIAA trials and scandals

    Yes.

    No.

    What have you submitted lately?

    Didn't you read what I read? There are already plenty of interesting submissions. The problem is in the selection of the submissions. If slashdot wants to make me an editor, I'd be happy to help them out with that.

    --
    Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
  3. Re:Too much detail by whiledo · · Score: 1, Troll

    You have heard of the firehose, haven't you? You have a say.

    Yes, I have and I do. Turns out that's not all it takes to front page a story, though. Front paged stories get discussion. Hence, I would like more interesting front page stories in order to have more interesting discussions, rather than more and more anti-RIAA circle-jerks.

    It's really not such a difficult concept.

    --
    Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
  4. Re:Too much detail by whiledo · · Score: -1, Troll

    Getting tired of posting this, but once again - I'm not disinterested in the cases. I'm disinterested in the daily minutiae of legal maneuvering in the cases. Those who can't tell the difference between those two will continue to fail to understand my point. Won't keep them from responding, though.

    --
    Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
  5. Re:Too much detail by ground.zero.612 · · Score: -1, Troll

    I would like more interesting discussion. +4 Insightful is a fucking joke when your post (essentially a whine that you don't like reading about RIAA) is Off Topic. Can someone mod this guy +5 Whiner and add a filter for Whiners?

    --
    "Be prepared, son. That's my motto. Be prepared." --Joe Hallenbeck
  6. Piss by nausea_malvarma · · Score: -1, Troll

    Ass Cock Shit