Slashdot Mirror
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."
Do we really need so many status updates on the day-to-day goings-on in all the RIAA trials and scandals
Yes.
surely the editors can find something else in the pile of submissions that would be even slightly more interesting.
What have you submitted lately?
Free Martian Whores!
With the RIAA's blatant disregard for sanity with its imaginary damages. My imaginary friend Drop Dead Fred was more real.
Just because you are wrong and I called you out on it doesn't mean I am a Troll.
Maybe the court copyrighted them?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
...as a citizen I've been "deeply concerned" by the US Court system's "blatant disregard" for our rights against the RIAA/MPAA and their ilk.
I'm deeply concerned that the court is being the RIAA's pawn and making orders that have no other purpose than to protect a slimy group of companies' public image...
Do you have ESP?
To me, Nesson's conduct is right on the line between brilliant tactics, and just plain nuts. I can see it either way.
Check the mp3 URL's on TFA. Jury tainting is a bullshit excuse. They know damn well if the public knew the facts about what was going on in our courtroom[we pay for]: we would be outside with pitchforks and torches waiting to lynch the plaintiff.
It's a horrible attempt at keeping the taxpayers in the dark about this whole ordeal.
Trackball users will be first against the wall.
The professor had to expect something like this. It's like playing chess. He'll respond with his next move, etc...
It's interesting to watch this and the Camara case unfold. Much better than 'Lost' or Reality TV because the results actually do effect me.
These professors (this one and the city of heroes professor) are bypassing rules to basically focus on the x,y, or z. There are rules for engaging 2 or more people, societies and most definitely the judicial systems. Trying to focus on the abstract with out playing by the rules gets you kicked out of the game. It's no real loss when you get kicked out of an MMO by the player base you can move on.
However, when you mess up a court case you start setting precedents, and screwing a lot more people than yourself and your client. Pissing off a judge which this Prof. has done before is not going to bode well. Maybe he should stick to academia.
Disconnect from the RIAA.
- Do not provide them with money, directly or indirectly.
- Do not consume their products, legally or illegally.
As a bad faith actor, the RIAA must be exiled from our community.
Only consume music that can be purchased directly from the artists themselves.
Convince two others to do the same.
You have heard of the firehose, haven't you? You have a say.
Free Martian Whores!
The better question is: do we really need the RIAA???
Their irrelevant business model is built on artificial scarcity that could only work in a time where information carriers and distribution were the bottlenecks. Now with the internet and ridiculously large storage devices, this bottleneck has been eliminated entirely. So much in fact, that everyone can carry tens of thousands of songs - entire genres - in their pocket.
They need and deserve to fail. This is of course not easy, since they can go to court and refer to laws and acts that they themselves either wrote or lobbied for!
It is a very important fight and one that needs to be won. I say: give us all the information there is!
see a Text Widget
These are cases that affect all of us. Your disinterest is not necessarily a reflection on the desires of the rest of us. Personally, if I never saw another MMORG post again I'd be happy as a clam, but you don't see me posting in those threads asking why they're so commonly approved. How about a little live-and-let-live?
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
So... Firehose? I know it's a new feature and all, but still.
The better question is: do we really need the RIAA???
No, we don't. But we already all agree on that. Either that, or those who feel otherwise are set in their ways. So most of your post is just more preaching to the choir. Would you say you see any actual insight coming about from this new information? Would it in any way have helped you to read a single post about this order, rather than getting an update once the order has been responded to and the topic has been mostly decided?
That's my main beef. I like to hear updates, but we've just gotten too fine grained. We don't really need to know about every specific motion and order and legal maneuver. Lawyers on both sides in every trial do tons of shit, not expecting a lot of it to work but just trying it out. For people who are really obsessed with legal maneuvering, Ray's blog is a fine source of daily info.
Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
Do you really need to be a baker to tell that a loaf of bread is stale?
Ezekiel 23:20
this process is so clean and efficient when the RIAA's the victim but when the RIAA lawyers break rules this stuff, if it happens, gets dragged on and on until it's forgotten.
In a word, "yes".
You can see from this article and the pressure that's being put on Professor Nesson to keep the proceedings secret that the RIAA has reasons to keep what it's doing out of the media.
That's the best reason I can think of for making sure it gets in the media at every opportunity. Unfortunately, we cannot rely on our justice system or corporate media, both of whom are heavily influenced by corporate money, to tell us what's going on.
Maybe you think the most important thing we can read about on Slashdot is the latest patches for the iPhone, but what's happening in our courts right now is going to have a much greater impact on our lives and use of technology for years to come.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The way I see things, that one is the actual problem. If they did not have so much undue influence over the political process they very well may have been forced to adapt to the Information Age already. Even if that isn't true at all, I would still say it's a much bigger and more serious problem that our politicians are doing a better job of representing monied interests like the RIAA/MPAA than they are of representing the people.
I think the biggest single mistake we made was to give corporations all of the rights of a real person. The one right that should be explicitly denied to them is participation in the political process (particularly lobbying and campaign donations). That should be against the law, with the penalty being the revocation of their corporate charter, the public auctioning of all assets, and the proceeds returning to the shareholders. If they participate in politics by means of front groups, that should be against the same law with the addition of criminal fraud charges, personally applicable to any members of management who helped to arrange it.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
You know, you might want to be here for more than a couple of months before you start telling the editors how to do their jobs.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Well you know, the RIAAs crimes do not go away, just because you find them less interesting with time.
I bet when the Nazis rose in Germany, you would also stated that there would be too much stories about the NSDAP in the news.
Ooh, it bores you? Well, then we must stop. Because your entertainment is the most important thing on the planet! Nothing can come between you and it.
How rude of some people, to actually still care about the systematic deconstruction of our freedom and of the Internet as we know it.
Stop whining! If you want to stop those stories, DO SOMETHING against the RIAA!
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Yes! Slashdot's new game!
RIAA on White, Sanity on Black
It's an Alekhine's Defense to the mark!
1. RIAA-e4, Jammie Thomas - f6
2. RIAA-e5, Jammie Thomas -d5
3. RIAA-d4, Prof Nesson- d6
4. RIAA-c4, Jammie Thomas gets kicked to b6 with the 1.92Mil verdict.
5. RIAA-f4 , ____
We have only about 3 moves left before they get a total lock. Our move.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
How is it that everyone on this site with a 7-digit UID is actually an old-timer with a single-digit UID who forgot his password? It's uncanny.
Only consume music that can be purchased directly from the artists themselves.
Convince two others to do the same.
This might actually solve the real problem. It would also send the right message.
Nope. What will happen should this actually occur, is that the RIAA will go crying to Congress: "The Evil Content Pirates(tm) are stealing our profits!!!!! We need even nastier laws!!!"
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
I've seen some news regarding some lawsuits over ringtones being "a public performance." I wonder what would happen if we printed off 1000 copies of the RIAA's Top 10 Billboard Chart songs and gathered around the courthouse each break to sing these copyrighted songs publicly.
DDoS the judicial system by doing public performances of all these copyrighted songs. There's no fucking way the courts could keep up with even 100 of these new cases a day...
"Be prepared, son. That's my motto. Be prepared." --Joe Hallenbeck
You remember your uid but not the password?
No worries, I understand...my original UID was CmdrTaco until some jackass hijacked it.
Clue for you: you can create new accounts. My oldest one dates to right after they added accounts.
And my other car is a Ferrari.
If someone keeps poisoning the bread, should we stop telling everyone that the bread is poisoned, because it's boring news?
If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
I remember my username. It's rather easy, considering it's my initials.
Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
Yeah, given the attitude you hear from some congressmen, I wouldn't be surprised if they just taxed us all and fed the money to record labels without regard to whether they earned the money. And somehow the action will be praised as a defense of "free market ideals", since it's believed to be a god-given right for large companies to make huge profits.
The Judge indicated that she was 'deeply concerned' about Prof. Nesson's apparent 'blatant disregard' of her order."
The many woes of the geek in court:
1 The lawyer who tells him what only what he wants to hear.
2 The pro bono lawyer with an axe to grind:
"You too can become a poster child for the EFF!"
3 The law professor who thinks he would have made a hotshot trial attorney.
4 The defendant who also thinks he would have made a hotshot trial attorney.
5 The lawyer with an unholy gift for pissing off a judge.
6 The defendant who takes the stand.
Only a geek could unleash such a steaming pile of shit - and never catch a whiff of it. "Tar and feathers ain't good enough for him, boys!"
7 The lawyer who ups the stakes each time he loses a round. The defendant who comes along for the ride.
The Supreme Court accepts perhaps 150 cases a year for oral argument. You just might make the cut.
You might also be the big winner in the tri-state lotto.
Ray, can you provide any insight into what Professor Nesson is trying to accomplish? On the face of it, he seems to be shooting himself in both feet.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
An even better question is: do we really need copyright?
Fair question, but I think the short answer is yes. But the point of copyright protection was once to protect creators from abuses by big business. In the time of Goethe, for instance, if he did not have family money and wealthy patrons, his writing would not have supported him. When he finished a book, it would get one good printing, and then all the feeder-level publishers would buy one copy each, and make copies themselves. All works would immediately become commodities.
A little more recently, you can look to artists like Little Richard, whose songs were used in Disney films, commercials, TV shows, over and over and over, without any payment to him, because ASCAP wasn't there to enforce copyright protections.
Metallica aside, most artists aren't worried about individuals pirating their music. Hell, I'd be thrilled if someone decided that my old band's music was awesome and it hit number one on the torrents. That would mean that my art touched people. But if Roy Disney decided that one of my songs was great for his multi-billion-dollar film and didn't want to pay me a dime, that would be unacceptable.
My feeling is that copyright is necessary, but it's being abused, and the abusers are working hard to limit--even destroy--any "fair use" cases that we've taken for granted.
The CB App. What's your 20?
It will be a major occurrence if he actually gets sanctioned. If he doesn't, it will just be another blip. So why not wait until he actually gets sanctioned to post about it? Does anyone think that somehow we can change the judge's mind on this issue?
Having the minutiae ("someone is thinking about doing something but hasn't done it yet") left to blogs like NYCL's excellent one isn't depriving anyone. As far as the "don't read it" argument goes, the problem is that I am interested in the cases. I can't tell it's minutiae that has no effect on the case yet (again, when she decides to sanction him, then it will have had an effect) until after I've read it. So I read post after post, each time rolling my eyes afterwards thinking "damn, I thought something had actually happened." This time I just decided to post about it.
Sorry you didn't find my post interesting. I suggest to fix this that you don't read it. ;)
Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
Three cars are jumping rope when one breaks down, the other two look at each other; shrug; and then Tuesday starts.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
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.
The reason this thread is taking up most of the discussion is that there's nothing to discuss. This story is almost identical to yesterday's story that garnered a whopping 123 comments (including all the down-moderated ones). Today's "news" is just that the judge took the next step and asked Nesson to respond. Then they'll be a step after that when she rules based on his response. Couldn't we have just waited until the ruling, because you'd have the same thing to talk about, only then it would actually not be hypothetical. And if the previous story was worthy of posting and this one is, too, wouldn't it be logical that when she rules one way or the other, then that'd be worthy of posting? Can you see what I mean by minutiae?
I'm not really trying to prove my point anymore. Either people get it or they don't. I just have the unfortunate character weakness that when someone addresses a comment to me, I respond. If people stopped doing that, took their own advice and ignored things they aren't interested in, this would have been over long, long ago.
Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
How dare you speak to me like that. After all, I am the original # 3, I just forgot my password. And I would like to point out that my current UID is only 6 digits smartypants!
So is mine, but it's a pretty big difference, eh? :P
But if Roy Disney decided that one of my songs was great for his multi-billion-dollar film and didn't want to pay me a dime, that would be unacceptable.
I understand where you're coming from on feeling like you need to control your own music in such a way, but in reality I think you'd be far better off if they used it and didn't get a dime. It'd promote you far beyond anything you could do on your own, assuming people like the music. It's really only when bands get huge, like Metallica, that it makes more financial sense for them to be more restrictive with the music being played outside of their concerts.
Sorry, I accidentally posted something on-topic. My fan club will be terribly disappointed.
Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
I disagree. This is a major issue, whether he gets sanctioned or not. At stake is whether the Judge can legally prevent him from posting a recording of a public proceeding.
I: Did you ever bother to read this? I didn't post anything agreeing with the RIAA. My post was how NYCL's post made it sound like the RIAA was gonna get smacked down, and the complete opposite happened. I was disappointed.
LOVE: This was basically the same thing, only the first time it was a general comment and the second time it was directed at Ray, who responded. It's funny you can take a comment where I say I don't like the verdict that Jammie Thomas is guilty and claim that's RIAA shill.
THE: Saying it would help her to have an alibi is being a shill and supporting DRM? If I said it would help Hans Reiser if he had an alibi, would that mean I'm a murder shill?
RIAA: Again, saying that we need to change the pro-RIAA laws before we can get the judges to follow them is being an RIAA shill? I'm beginning to understand why you think I think so differently from you. You take my comments and read them to mean the exact opposite.
ALOT #1: Okay, now this is just getting silly. That was a thread about gun control. Which part of that is "support for the RIAA, MPAA, DRM and a broad interpretation of the rights of secondary intellectual property owners"? You're really grasping here, buddy.
ALOT #2: Responding to a post claiming the GPL is pro-(software)copyright by stating that the GPL uses copyright against itself and would be unnecessary if we got rid of copyrights altogether is now pro-copyright?
Did you just decide to hate me first and then read my old posts to fit your mindset, or have you really misread my posts so badly?
Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
You are correct. The RIAA does indeed have at least some argument on the grounds that music piracy does actually happen, and that is why they have pursued legal action against so many people. The thing you might not have come to understand when you made your comment was that the RIAA will continue to blame piracy for all of their problems whether it really is happening or not. They have brought people to court that never used a computer, let alone downloaded anything. They can't seem to decide how much money they are losing every year from piracy, and every number I've ever seen looks outlandish and impossible; probably due to the fact that their model for determining damages involves things like 'possible downloads' as opposed to 'actual' ones. If every music file on the internet miraculously disappeared today, I can guarantee you tomorrow there will be a press release about how the RIAA believes music piracy has cost them trillions in revenue tomorrow, and now the pirates have moved to sneakernet which is something they can't track and they'll pay the media to demonize it as the next big piracy network without explaining what it actually is.
Simply put, they had a successful business model for decades and it fell apart completely but they believe they still have the right to receive all the money, and they won't stop at lying to the government or anyone else as long as it gets what they want.
to actually still care about the systematic deconstruction of our freedom
I suspect that a systematic deconstruction of our freedom would actually be quite boring.
I'm actually so elite that I have the only Slashdot UID that has a fractional component thanks to some Y2K hackery. However, due to shitty CSS on the site (designed by me, because I'm that 1337), my UID is multipled by 100,000 in the display. I don't fix the CSS now because I like my 6-digit UID. It allows me to hang out with you commoners, sort of like a celebrity who wears a big-ass fedora and Wayfarers.
In all seriousness, I abandoned a login after a major change in the status of my education and personal philosophy. I just didn't want to be associated with that person anymore.
This guy doesn't have enough sense to anonymously leak the recordings to the web so he can't be sanctioned for them, and he has the nerve to call himself a professor?
Congratulations.
You have now upped the ante to the point where you risk doing time for contempt of court -
your tenured professorship at Harvard Law is at stake -
and your license to practice is at stake.
You will also very likely have made such a wreckage of your client's case that he will have no option but to settle out of court.
I think the reason the *.A.As get so much coverage is because thanks to their treasonous bribery...err I mean lobbying, any pretense of having functional copyrights and patents have long been replaced by illegal laws written in backrooms with bribes trading hands to ensure that the top 4% get even more truckloads o' cash.
I mean for Pete's sake, Steamboat Willie is STILL under copyright! Is it encouraging the "arts and sciences" to be cutting checks for something made when planes were made out of cloth and antibiotics were just a dream? Hell no! The laws have gotten so corrupt they are a joke! There is pretty nobody out there now that "isn't a criminal" thanks to asshats like the RIAA saying ripping you CD to your iPod should be criminal since you didn't cut them a check first, and you watch, they'll pull some more treasonous bribery...err I mean lobbying and that will become the law of the land. I mean is there anybody that thinks 1.9+ million verdicts are fair? Meanwhile these same thieves use a little scam called Hollywood Accounting to fuck the actual creators of the works out of the pittance that they get compared to the blood sucking leech multinational corps.
So if you want to know why the RIAA stories keep getting played, it is because they are proof that our courts are broken and our laws are corrupt. After all, in a sane and just society nobody would even be able to keep a straight face while arguing that 150 year+ copyrights are fair or benefit the artist. Yeah, and I'm sure that those checks to Disney are keeping Zombie Walt in fresh paints so he can work on "The Little Mermaid 27" which of course is an excellent example in hypocrisy, as Disney and their pals kill the Public Domain while robbing it of ideas as fast as their thieving hands can grab. Sadly short of violent revolution I simply see no way we will take back the country or even the planet from the super corps. After all, what use is your vote if they can walk in five minutes after the election with their checkbook and buy the politicians vote, and legally I might add?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Just look at the legal tactics employed in the various cases.
SCO (like the RIAA) needs to be put out of its misery but they refise to lie down & die.
The RIAA tactics to delay & avoid giving real evidence especially about the real damages incurred is (IMHO) straight out of the SCO textbook.
I wish judges had the nerve to standup to this obvious bullshit & lies and tell them to stop wasting the courts time and get to the nitty gritty. But judges (in the USA) are AFAIK, elected and have to run campaigns so they risk cutting off the source of funding if they do.
I prefer the totally independent judiciary we have here in the UK. I'm not saying it is without fault but judges can give the Government a real boody nose (read Lord Scarman's works) without fear of retaliation.
IMHO, the US civil legal system as shown to the world by the RIAA & SCO cases is horribly broken and it is far too obvious that the only people who benefit are the lawyers who created it in the first place (when they become law makers).
Ok, Rant over, I can get back to breakfast.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
In other words, your well-reasoned and clearly-articulated arguments were falling on deaf ears when people saw the username "AwSumDood69"?
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
Consider; This man is willing to put his name to the disobedient act because he believes the law against it is wrong, and is willing to pay the price for that belief in order to get the reasoning behind his action heard, and presedent set. Right or wrong, I admire his audacity.
When did you last put your neck on the line for justice?
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
The public should have a right to view the proceedings of the court. As risk of judicial bias, due to party affiliation and political contributions; in addition to the high profile nature of the case, the additional access and disclousure is necessary to secure the confidence of the population at large.
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
Perhaps. IANAL. But this is not a murder trial, it is a civil proceeding, in which the public has a great deal of interest. In order to keep it away from the public, doesn't the judge need some kind of valid justification? A "compelling interest" as it were?