Obama DOJ Sides With RIAA Again In Tenenbaum

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.'"

Comments

Re:Really? Seriously?

[jollyreaper]

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

I wasn't expecting to agree with everything Obama did, that would be simplistic. I just wasn't expecting to find so little to agree with. The same agenda advanced under Bush is advanced under Obama. And it's kind of clear that this isn't Obama's agenda, possessive, implying ownership, any more than it was Bush's -- they're the pitchmen.

Re:Hope and Change, baby!

[vlm]

That is patently false. If you look at political donations from Hollywood, it overwhelmingly favors Democrats. If one looks at executives of RIAA and MPAA companies the imbalance is even greater.

Pay one cop $1M each month to look the other way. Pay the other cop $2M each month to look the other way. Which cop turns you in? Answer, neither, because both want the money, and killing the goose that lays the golden eggs is no way to make money.

Re:Hope and Change, baby!

[Third Position]

At a certain point, you have to conclude that presidents are pretty much figureheads. I don't recollect any major policy changes when Clinton took over from Bush Sr., nor when Bush Jr. took over from Clinton, nor when Obama took over from Bush. No matter what they promise, conservative or liberal, Democrat or Republican, the actual policy shifts are marginal, no matter how much they've criticized their predecessor while running for office. This forces me to conclude that either a.) presidents are privy to some information upon coming to office that compels them all to respond in a similar manner, or b.) there's a Man Behind the Curtain that actually calls the shots, and presidents don't have the discretion to act as is commonly thought.