Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Obama DOJ Sides With RIAA Again In Tenenbaum

Posted by timothy on from the could-make-a-jaded-man-more-jaded dept.

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Despite having had some time to get their act together, Obama's Department of Justice has filed yet another brief defending the RIAA's outlandish statutory damages theory — that someone who downloaded an mp3 with a 99-cent retail value, causing a maximum possible damages of 35 cents, is liable for from $750 to $150,000 for each such file downloaded, in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum. The 25- page brief (PDF) continues the DOJ's practice of (a) ignoring the case law which holds that the Supreme Court's due process jurisprudence is applicable to statutory damages, (b) ignoring the law review articles to like effect, (c) ignoring the actual holding of the 1919 case they rely upon, (d) ignoring the fact that the RIAA failed to prove 'distribution' as defined by the Copyright Act, and (e) ignoring the actual wording and reasoning of the Supreme Court in its leading Gore and Campbell decisions. Jon Newton of p2pnet.net attributes the Justice Department's 'oversights' to the 'eye-popping number of people [in its employ] who worked for, and/or are directly connected with, Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music's RIAA.'"

10 of 528 comments (clear)

  1. Hope and Change, baby! by bheer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    or not. Obama or not, remember that Hollywood greases Republican and Democrat pockets alike. Many of the big guys at the MPAA and RIAA are Democrats too, which must surely help.

    As long as Hollywood gives politicians glamour by attending fundraisers, and actual cold hard cash, you won't find anyone in the government willing to speak out against Big Content. The only thing that can change this is public opinion.

    --
    Go somewhere random
    1. Re:Hope and Change, baby! by mangu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only thing that can change this is public opinion.

      And public opinion is molded by Big Content. We are fucked.

    2. Re:Hope and Change, baby! by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      remember that Hollywood greases Republican and Democrat pockets alike.

      Though it should be noted that Hollywood contributes much more to the Democrats than the Republicans.

      76% to Dems in 2010 (so far), 78% to Dems in 2008, not less than 62% in any election cycle in the last two decades.

      So it's insane to assume that a Democratic administration is going to rein in the entertainment industry. It's not likely that a Republican administration will either, but they're more likely to be able to give up the relatively small amount of money they get from Hollywood than the Dems will.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    3. Re:Hope and Change, baby! by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. I hoped Obama would be a good President, I feared he would not. He's just a politician, not the god folks were making him out to be.

      So far I'm starting to lose hope in him; first the "health care reform" that does nothing but line insurance executives' pockets, now Tanenbaum and the RIAA.

      Change, my ass.

      --
      Free Martian Whores!
  2. Really? Seriously? by wandazulu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm having that "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" moment that I really didn't want to have.

  3. Obama was a Constitutional Law Prof. by GPLDAN · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Obama taught, was editor of the Harvard Law Review, and graduated top of his class.


    How he can abide this DOJ finding is really unknowable, outside of politics. It is behavior and outcomes like this that cost his party Mass. last night, and may well cost him his re-election bid in 2012. Pollingplace.com showed that last night in Mass., 37% of voters that voted for this independent that won, did so in protest of Democrats favoring Wall Street in the bailout.

    The lesson is simple: Either the DOJ and the Obama administration stop taking sides against Main Street and for the big corporate interest, or they will keep losing.

  4. Deep breaths here people by nenya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the President's job folks: to defend the laws passed by Congress and signed into law by a sitting President. It's implied by the Oath of Office. Presidents ignoring laws they don't like by refusing to defend them in court--which is what the DOJ is doing here--would be a pretty flagrant violation of the obligations of the executive.

    This is not the first time and will not be the last that a President, through his officers, defends a law he isn't thrilled about. Just because DOJ lawyers show up with a brief in support of a law does not mean that the President--or even the DOJ lawyers, for crying out loud--believe either 1) that the law is worth defending, or 2) the validity of their own arguments. They're just doing their jobs.

    1. Re:Deep breaths here people by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It'd be far worse if the DOJ started picking and choosing which laws they wanted to enforce/defend.

      You misunderstand what the Constitution is. It is a law. And it is the highest law, in the sense that any law which conflicts with it is invalid. The Supreme Court is the interpreter of the laws, and has determined that the Constitution does not permit damage awards which are 'disproportioned' to the actual damage sustained. The DOJ, as attorneys, swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, as did the President, as did the Supreme Court justices.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  5. Hello?... by Genda · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Folks, what part of "The RIAA is in your pocket, and in your life" are you not getting? For the love of Pete, the Vice President is a media hit-man... what do they have to do before it's clear, carve their initials in your forehead? There is no law, no juris-prudence, no honest, decent, or rational bit of thinking that the RIAA won't pave over, pay to have overturned, ignored, or publicly gutted, to protect their charges' strangle hold on media. Once they are finished with this little piece of business, they can move to the next piece. Make all use public or private payable, maybe they can even get a tax passed on the presumed number of people at anytime who my be humming a tune to themselves. That and make all new music created from that day forward, which is not owned by an affiliate of the RIAA illegal to listen to. They want a monopoly on sound, and they want to own your ears, and they want to utterly destroy anybody who get's in the way of what they want. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW...

  6. On behalf of we who warned you about Obama, by FiloEleven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I told you so.

    Not that McCain would have been any better.

    Stop voting for the state-approved candidates.
    Stop relying on a party to do your homework for you.
    Stop believing that either of the main ones has your interests in mind.

    --
    Your brain is not a computer.