Harvard Team Asks Court To Allow Live Broadcast Of Tenenbaum Case Against RIAA
from the should-be-fun dept
A bunch of folks have sent in the story that Charles Nesson of Harvard, who is challenging the constitutionality of the RIAA's lawsuits against file sharers, has filed a motion asking that the trial be broadcast live over the internet, amusingly using the RIAA's own words to support his request. From the beginning, the RIAA has always insisted that its lawsuits were part of a broad "educational campaign" to teach people about the evils of file sharing. Nesson notes that, if this is true, the RIAA should obviously have no objection to such a trial being broadcast online. Somehow, it seems likely that there will be an objection.Given that the RIAA has supposedly given up its legal strategy -- while still moving forward with existing cases -- is anyone taking bets on how long it will be until the RIAA actively tries to back out of the Tenenbaum lawsuit altogether? This case is pretty much the last thing the RIAA actually wants to go to court -- whether broadcast or not. Even if it wins the case in the end, this lawsuit is going to involve a lot of dirty laundry airing that the RIAA probably doesn't want out there.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: charles neeson, constitutionality, fines, joel tenenbaum, lawsuits, penalties
Companies: riaa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Real Ignorant Arrogant Assholes!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Please pass the popcorn!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Best Wishes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
high educational value
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hoisted
To the RIAA: Your petard, you've been hoisted by it!
To the Harvard team: Pure genius!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hoisted
It goes "He was hoist by his own petard.
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/hoist%20by%20your%20own%20petard.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hoisted
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hoisted
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If OJ's trial was televised...
I also wonder if ex-RIAA leader Hilary Rosen will take the stand.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: id almost pay to see this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: id almost pay to see this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: id almost pay to see this
"We sued everyone, and all I got was this lousy t-shirt."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Limewire
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What Mr. Nesson is not challenging the constitutionality of lawsuits, but a much narrower issue directed solely to the statutory damages provision of copyright law. He is pressing the argument that the statutory damages provision should be treated as a quasi-criminal provision for which the full panoply of rights afforded criminal defendants should apply.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Mr. Feltner was upset that he was not given a jury trial to determine what statutory damages should be awarded. At the district court he had been dinged by the Judge to the tune of about $9M. The Supreme Court gave him his wish, and the case went back to the district court so that a jury could make the determination. It did...about $39M that held up on appeals all the way to the Supreme Court.
It is a well known maxim, "Be careful what you ask for because you might get it." Mr. Feltner got it, but certainly not in the way he anticipated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I want one!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
broadcast
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh, Goody
That is the video I want to see streamed out over the internet. Because that is the way our good old American court system REALLY works.
Glad you're oblivious to all that, Mike, because your ethics would require you to report it if YOU saw that kind of stuff going on. Hey, maybe that's why you are relegated to blogging instead of representing all those corporate clients before the Supreme Court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh, Goody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bold headlines take a whole new definition.
Put it right here →:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
While it's good that Harvard's doing something about this, they could still do more, like filing criminal charges against the RIAA's upper management, seeking disbarment of their lawyers, and challenging the constitutionality of their new 3-strikes policy they want to implement. The RIAA should also be forced to pay back everyone they've sued the amount they were originally sued for, and then be shut down if they're still somehow afloat after that. The participating labels should also be penalized as they're fully involved in the RIAA by backing their suits and tactics.
Simply do to the RIAA and labels what they've been doing to everyone else for years. And force the execs to listen to their own crappy girly-pop "music" over and over until they realize just how bad it really is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RIAA Shakedowns.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bring Justice back
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bring Justice back
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shakedown, Breakdown, Takedown, You're Busted....
What happens when the RIAA falsely accuses someone three times and gets them kicked off the internet? What recourse does the individual have? Are they given any chance to defend themselves or even see the 'proof' (yeah right, like there is any of that) that the RIAA has on them? This is nothing more than giving police powers to a private corporation, which I think most people would agree is a bad idea. This is actually beyond police powers, as they would be the judge, jury, and executioner so to speak (and for many people these days, getting cut off from the internet could be very close to execution as many people depend on the internet for their jobs, lives, contacts.
Oh well, I for one will welcome our jackbooted goosestepping overlords from the **AA, and all you sheeple (TM pending) should as well, because if you haven't been accused of doing anything wrong, then you don't have anything to worry about, right? The **AA would never make false accusations or work from bad information, right?
If you believe any of that crap, then I got a bridge for you as well, it's a steal at only 5 million.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The only good lawyer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]