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.
...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?
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.
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.
Do you really need to be a baker to tell that a loaf of bread is stale?
Ezekiel 23:20
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
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.
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
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.
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 problem here is "pissing off" the judge. Why should that be possible? I know the judge is only human after all, but for fuck's sake, now we have to worry the judge "doesn't like you" in a case? Justice indeed.
:) The trouble is, this sort of thing is difficult to prove... and even more difficult to get anything done about when you do have evidence... *sigh* I need a beer. :)
I am not excusing the professor(s) conduct in this matter, but I am not excusing a judge who should be putting his/her bias in the closet next to the raincoats either. Judges who act with willful contempt for either party (or favor... take the DeCSS case as an example) in a case should be thrown off the bench (preferably from a great distance up...) Bias has no purpose in black robes... Justice is blind.... and it should be a Vulcan.
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
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.
As much as I love the general principal of pissing off judges...why is this idiot pissing off the judge???
Because there's no reason this proceeding should be kept private. It's about copyright infringement, where enforcement should be a public issue -- especially when damages are being issued at those who break copyrights. Can you IMAGINE living in a world where you can get sued for copyright infringement and not let anyone know what you infringed, how you infringed, or what the reasoning was behind the order? How is there sanity in that?
Lawyer: Sir, we have 13 recorded attempts of you singing "Eye of the Tiger" while jogging. These are blatant copyright infringements and for each of these public performances, you face a fine of $80,000.
You: Lots of people sing "Eye of the Tiger" while jogging, and they don't get sued!
Lawyer: Oh, thousands are getting sued for it. Now you'll have to agree not to discuss your case with anyone but your lawyer or you'll be spending jail time as well. We're willing to settle for $5,000. We take credit cards!
Copyright enforcement should never, ever be held behind closed doors unless at the request of the prosecuted in order to preserve their reputation if found innocent. I, personally, would be willing to spend jail time in order to make this point, if I had to. I would hope anyone who thinks themself an honest American would at least consider it.
I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
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.
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.