The RIAA is going after Ray Beckerman is because they want to shut down his blog. Pure and simple. Recording Industry vs. The People [blogspot.com] has made it possible for defense lawyers in different jurisdictions to be aware of what the RIAA was doing in the courts, so they could hone their legal arguments and focus on what matters. Without Ray's blog, defense lawyers would have to spend countless hours "reinventing the wheel" in redundant legal research. Against the perverse, well-funded multi-jurisdiction legal campaign by the RIAA, a defense lawyer might have no chance at all, were it not for Ray's blog.
We have the First Amendment precisely because blogs like Ray's can exist. He defends democracy against RIAA fascism, and is a true patriot. (Said without irony or sarcasm.)
Thanks, gruffbear. No way these idiots are shutting down anything.
I can't shake the image in my head of a CGI rendered Ray Beckerman, dressed as a wizard, standing on a desolate landscape. Intense prog metal plays in the background. Four large, hideous dragons strike at him with breaths of fire, ice, poisons, and lightning. He shields himself from their breath and razor claws with powerful barriers of shimmering force, returning their attacks in kind with purple-black bolts of magical energy.
One swoops low, lashing out his sinuous forceps toward the wizard, striking hard at his shoulder. A flash of light blinds the beast as the wizard draws forth his ancient blade and pieces the dragon deeply. Its deafening cry of pain is heard for miles as the beast plummets to the ground, thrashing wildly. The ground quakes beneath the weight gruesome monster. Raising his staff high, the wizard slams its end into the ground, chating a word of power. The earth splits and the beast is swallowed whole into the fiery depths of the underworld, never to again to menace mortal men.
The wizard turns with a dark grin toward the other three dragons, steeling himself again pain of the flesh. "Come fiends," he yells, "Come so that I may deliver you, too, to your final rest!"
Ah... the imagery just keeps going on and on! My next D&D character is gonna be a badass Wizard named Ray Beckerman.
Believe it or not, if you take away the good writing and the more dramatic imagery, it sounds exactly like some encounters I had as a kid growing up in South Ozone Park, Queens. What happens next is the other three dragons crawl away into the darkness.
I figure a good donation amount would be the cost of one average RIAA CD. Wouldn't take too many people donating that to cover his legal expenses... All we need is a paypal link
why is this story, about a totally ridiculous and doomed motion, getting so much attention, when the story I submitted about the landmark Atlantic v. Brennan case languishing in the Firehose? Mr. Brennan doesn't even have a lawyer to defend him.
Something tells me that he isn't going to comment here, as, I'm sure, all such comments would be admissable. It's fine to talk about other people's cases, but prudent to be quiet about your own.
Yes, no way I would say publicly that the motion is frivolous, meritless, and an abuse of the judicial system.
Link to Ray's blog with "RIAA" or "The truth about the RIAA" as the anchor text, and with "RIAA" as the title text. Writing a a few paragraphs of commentary about the situation will help further improve his page ranking as it increases the relevance of the links.
Read the truth about the RIAA here.
Thanks for the support. The RIAA's motion is frivolous, and I will be responding to it in short order. The responsive papers are due October 13th.
It's just an obvious attempt on their part to weasel out of their liability for attorneys fees, after torturing this innocent woman for the past 3 years.
Some folks have indicated an interest in contributing financially.
Anyone who wants to contribute to Ms. Lindor can do so here. Anyone who wants to contribute to the Expert Witness Defense Fund, which helps people like Ms. Lindor with hiring experts and tech consultants can do so here. Anyone who wants to contribute to me, to help me with the work I do in my blogging and getting the word out, can do so here. Another way to help out my blog is to make purchases through the affiliate ads I post on the blog. (If there are products or services you're looking for that aren't represented there, let me know, and I'll try to get affiliate ads posted for them.
Here is my post providing the details of the accusations.
The RIAA's litigation campaign is in its death throes, as are the 4 big record companies who are behind it. I guess this is the way dying hyenas act, they lash out. Not to worry, they will still lose.
I haven't done a detailed analysis of it yet, just a quick run-through, but it jumped out at me that he totally got it wrong on (a) 'verbatim copying', (b) competing with an encyclopedia that hasn't been written, and (c) competing with poems and songs that weren't even part of the case. He lost sight of the forest for the trees. If he stepped back, he'd realize this was a classic fair use.
Agreed.
In particular, I believe that the presence of a corporation (WB) muddies the waters significantly.
Other than their possible interest as whatevers of the movies, I scratch my head even wondering what the hell business of WB it even is to be worrying about the lexicon in the first place.
Why WB is even trying to exert influence on JK is beyond me unless it's the sort of gung-ho squashing that the RIAA is so fond of.
Warner Bros. is a particularly litigious corporation.
Off the top of my head, here are 3 obvious reasons why it's "flagrantly wrong":
:There is nothing inconsistent in it being a fair use reference work and it doing a lot of "verbatim copying". The question is whether the copying was substantial in relation to the size of the work copied, which in this case it clearly was not.
Secondly, it did not compete with her 'encyclopedia' for one simple reason... there is no encyclopedia.
Thirdly, it did not compete with her poems and songs because... she never presented any evidence to that effect.
I would quite like to see the author of the Lexicon revise his work substantially, probably improving it in the process, and coming back to get the injunction lifted so that the second edition could be printed.
That's making a huge assumption. That Rowling and Warner Bros. would be willing to sit down with him and work it out, without benefit of another trial.
There needs to be a more detailed code of best practices, as, e.g., what has been agreed to for documentary film makers, or what we are hoping to see for user-generated online video. Also there should be some kind of very inexpensive arbitration forum where these issues can be resolved quickly, expeditiously, inexpensively, and before -- rather than after -- the creator has invested his or her time, energy, and money.
It seems to me that there has to be a fix for this: there has to be a way to get a legal ruling on your book BEFORE it goes into production. If there isn't, there should be.
Absolutely. That's the huge problem with "fair use" in US copyright law. You have to pay a fortune, and risk all kinds of exposure, to find out the answer. But the big content holders, like Rowling's co-plaintiff Warner Bros. Entertainment, have lobbyists and spokespeople going around saying fair use is fine just the way it is, and it's best to let the courts work it out. That's because they're happy to spend a million dollars on a case like this, since it earns them hundreds of millions of dollars worth of terror.
I am curious what is it that makes you so mad about this case.
The decision troubles me because it is flagrantly wrong, and -- because it is widely publicized -- will affect decisionmaking by creators and by publishers. I.e. it will have a 'chilling effect'.
The judge's analysis of transformation- in my opinion, not friendly to fair use- is enough to make a reference publication of a fictional work a greater risk than it was before the decision. I do think the judge wanted to do the right thing, but I don't think the judge did.
That is the tragedy in a decision such as this one.
By the points:
1) I fail to see how JKR is "damaged" by this lexicon, unless it misrepresents her books, which there is no argument that ever did.
There was no damage, hence the $6750 statutory damages award.
2) For JKR to claim that this "discouraged" her from writing her own encyclopedia (and giving all that money to charity, which is supposed to melt our hearts in sympathy for her), appears spurious and said to bolster her case is simply because it is so hard to prove false. One is left to believe that JKR has killed a superior work because she fears she can't compete with a better author here.
One of the most bizarre arguments ever made, that it competed with something she was thinking of writing.
3) Despite the large amount of copying that weighed against the lexicon author I find his work transformative rather than mere cut & paste because:
a) A huge amount of original research, organization, and sheer effort was put into its creation.
b) How can you write any lexicon without referring directly to and quoting the original facts in their most original (hence correct) form?
c) This is not intended to, nor would it ever be confused with, being a new, unauthorized HP novel.
Even the judge agreed it was mostly transformative. Only a lunatic would buy the 'lexicon' rather than the novel.
4) JKR is a very controlling author. You need only refer to her tightly demanded release dates for each new book and their draconian enforcement of early released copies for no apparent reason more than to bring additional fame to herself and allow her to read a couple chapters to a few children on the first night of official release.
Well her bringing such a mean-spirited lawsuit certainly supports that notion.
5) How could this have ever been infringement at all when it was never published due to prior restraint shown here? There should have been no statutory damages at all!
Should have been a defendant's verdict.
To me, when JKR put HP out in the world (and was rewarded more than handsomely for it) it became part of the world at large. It succeeded because we cared about it so much. To then say that only JKR can dictate who is allowed to comment on it afterwards def[ie]s logic, humanity, and reason.
... and the law.
That JKR found a judge to agree with her is equally sad.
Slashdot Mirror
The RIAA is going after Ray Beckerman is because they want to shut down his blog. Pure and simple. Recording Industry vs. The People [blogspot.com] has made it possible for defense lawyers in different jurisdictions to be aware of what the RIAA was doing in the courts, so they could hone their legal arguments and focus on what matters. Without Ray's blog, defense lawyers would have to spend countless hours "reinventing the wheel" in redundant legal research. Against the perverse, well-funded multi-jurisdiction legal campaign by the RIAA, a defense lawyer might have no chance at all, were it not for Ray's blog. We have the First Amendment precisely because blogs like Ray's can exist. He defends democracy against RIAA fascism, and is a true patriot. (Said without irony or sarcasm.)
Thanks, gruffbear. No way these idiots are shutting down anything.
Reading slashdot is not an obligation.
Now you tell me.
I can't shake the image in my head of a CGI rendered Ray Beckerman, dressed as a wizard, standing on a desolate landscape. Intense prog metal plays in the background. Four large, hideous dragons strike at him with breaths of fire, ice, poisons, and lightning. He shields himself from their breath and razor claws with powerful barriers of shimmering force, returning their attacks in kind with purple-black bolts of magical energy. One swoops low, lashing out his sinuous forceps toward the wizard, striking hard at his shoulder. A flash of light blinds the beast as the wizard draws forth his ancient blade and pieces the dragon deeply. Its deafening cry of pain is heard for miles as the beast plummets to the ground, thrashing wildly. The ground quakes beneath the weight gruesome monster. Raising his staff high, the wizard slams its end into the ground, chating a word of power. The earth splits and the beast is swallowed whole into the fiery depths of the underworld, never to again to menace mortal men. The wizard turns with a dark grin toward the other three dragons, steeling himself again pain of the flesh. "Come fiends," he yells, "Come so that I may deliver you, too, to your final rest!" Ah... the imagery just keeps going on and on! My next D&D character is gonna be a badass Wizard named Ray Beckerman.
Believe it or not, if you take away the good writing and the more dramatic imagery, it sounds exactly like some encounters I had as a kid growing up in South Ozone Park, Queens. What happens next is the other three dragons crawl away into the darkness.
I figure a good donation amount would be the cost of one average RIAA CD. Wouldn't take too many people donating that to cover his legal expenses... All we need is a paypal link
Here's a PayPal link.
Appreciate the contributions.
Try to pickup some adds from www.newegg.com. With all the computer dorks (including myself), you could live off the income.
Done.
Thanks for the recommendation.
why is this story, about a totally ridiculous and doomed motion, getting so much attention, when the story I submitted about the landmark Atlantic v. Brennan case languishing in the Firehose? Mr. Brennan doesn't even have a lawyer to defend him.
OK sorry about that. To make a contribution to Ms. Lindor, go here and click on PayPal button.
Something tells me that he isn't going to comment here, as, I'm sure, all such comments would be admissable. It's fine to talk about other people's cases, but prudent to be quiet about your own.
Yes, no way I would say publicly that the motion is frivolous, meritless, and an abuse of the judicial system.
Link to Ray's blog with "RIAA" or "The truth about the RIAA" as the anchor text, and with "RIAA" as the title text. Writing a a few paragraphs of commentary about the situation will help further improve his page ranking as it increases the relevance of the links. Read the truth about the RIAA here.
Thanks kimvette, good idea.
Thanks for the support. The RIAA's motion is frivolous, and I will be responding to it in short order. The responsive papers are due October 13th.
It's just an obvious attempt on their part to weasel out of their liability for attorneys fees, after torturing this innocent woman for the past 3 years.
Some folks have indicated an interest in contributing financially.
Anyone who wants to contribute to Ms. Lindor can do so here. Anyone who wants to contribute to the Expert Witness Defense Fund, which helps people like Ms. Lindor with hiring experts and tech consultants can do so here. Anyone who wants to contribute to me, to help me with the work I do in my blogging and getting the word out, can do so here. Another way to help out my blog is to make purchases through the affiliate ads I post on the blog. (If there are products or services you're looking for that aren't represented there, let me know, and I'll try to get affiliate ads posted for them.
Here is my post providing the details of the accusations.
The RIAA's litigation campaign is in its death throes, as are the 4 big record companies who are behind it. I guess this is the way dying hyenas act, they lash out. Not to worry, they will still lose.
I haven't done a detailed analysis of it yet, just a quick run-through, but it jumped out at me that he totally got it wrong on (a) 'verbatim copying', (b) competing with an encyclopedia that hasn't been written, and (c) competing with poems and songs that weren't even part of the case. He lost sight of the forest for the trees. If he stepped back, he'd realize this was a classic fair use.
I think the 2nd Circuit would have a problem with Judge Patterson's conclusions, and might well reverse.
you really can't know until after the trial if what you're doing was legal
Which in most cases means you just can't do it. Period.
Agreed. In particular, I believe that the presence of a corporation (WB) muddies the waters significantly. Other than their possible interest as whatevers of the movies, I scratch my head even wondering what the hell business of WB it even is to be worrying about the lexicon in the first place. Why WB is even trying to exert influence on JK is beyond me unless it's the sort of gung-ho squashing that the RIAA is so fond of.
Warner Bros. is a particularly litigious corporation.
I knew the rule, I just didn't know that the borg were behind it.
Off the top of my head, here are 3 obvious reasons why it's "flagrantly wrong":
:There is nothing inconsistent in it being a fair use reference work and it doing a lot of "verbatim copying". The question is whether the copying was substantial in relation to the size of the work copied, which in this case it clearly was not.
Secondly, it did not compete with her 'encyclopedia' for one simple reason... there is no encyclopedia.
Thirdly, it did not compete with her poems and songs because... she never presented any evidence to that effect.
I would quite like to see the author of the Lexicon revise his work substantially, probably improving it in the process, and coming back to get the injunction lifted so that the second edition could be printed.
That's making a huge assumption. That Rowling and Warner Bros. would be willing to sit down with him and work it out, without benefit of another trial.
So what's the solution
There needs to be a more detailed code of best practices, as, e.g., what has been agreed to for documentary film makers, or what we are hoping to see for user-generated online video. Also there should be some kind of very inexpensive arbitration forum where these issues can be resolved quickly, expeditiously, inexpensively, and before -- rather than after -- the creator has invested his or her time, energy, and money.
It seems to me that there has to be a fix for this: there has to be a way to get a legal ruling on your book BEFORE it goes into production. If there isn't, there should be.
Absolutely. That's the huge problem with "fair use" in US copyright law. You have to pay a fortune, and risk all kinds of exposure, to find out the answer. But the big content holders, like Rowling's co-plaintiff Warner Bros. Entertainment, have lobbyists and spokespeople going around saying fair use is fine just the way it is, and it's best to let the courts work it out. That's because they're happy to spend a million dollars on a case like this, since it earns them hundreds of millions of dollars worth of terror.
a nice thing for her to do.
I know that doesn't count much to some, but it matters to me.
I am curious what is it that makes you so mad about this case.
The decision troubles me because it is flagrantly wrong, and -- because it is widely publicized -- will affect decisionmaking by creators and by publishers. I.e. it will have a 'chilling effect'.
We still love you!
Thanks.
I needed that.
The judge's analysis of transformation- in my opinion, not friendly to fair use- is enough to make a reference publication of a fictional work a greater risk than it was before the decision. I do think the judge wanted to do the right thing, but I don't think the judge did.
That is the tragedy in a decision such as this one.
By the points: 1) I fail to see how JKR is "damaged" by this lexicon, unless it misrepresents her books, which there is no argument that ever did.
There was no damage, hence the $6750 statutory damages award.
2) For JKR to claim that this "discouraged" her from writing her own encyclopedia (and giving all that money to charity, which is supposed to melt our hearts in sympathy for her), appears spurious and said to bolster her case is simply because it is so hard to prove false. One is left to believe that JKR has killed a superior work because she fears she can't compete with a better author here.
One of the most bizarre arguments ever made, that it competed with something she was thinking of writing.
3) Despite the large amount of copying that weighed against the lexicon author I find his work transformative rather than mere cut & paste because: a) A huge amount of original research, organization, and sheer effort was put into its creation. b) How can you write any lexicon without referring directly to and quoting the original facts in their most original (hence correct) form? c) This is not intended to, nor would it ever be confused with, being a new, unauthorized HP novel.
Even the judge agreed it was mostly transformative. Only a lunatic would buy the 'lexicon' rather than the novel.
4) JKR is a very controlling author. You need only refer to her tightly demanded release dates for each new book and their draconian enforcement of early released copies for no apparent reason more than to bring additional fame to herself and allow her to read a couple chapters to a few children on the first night of official release.
Well her bringing such a mean-spirited lawsuit certainly supports that notion.
5) How could this have ever been infringement at all when it was never published due to prior restraint shown here? There should have been no statutory damages at all!
Should have been a defendant's verdict.
To me, when JKR put HP out in the world (and was rewarded more than handsomely for it) it became part of the world at large. It succeeded because we cared about it so much. To then say that only JKR can dictate who is allowed to comment on it afterwards def[ie]s logic, humanity, and reason.
That JKR found a judge to agree with her is equally sad.
Very.