Judge Approves Public Broadcast Of RIAA Lawsuit

from the educate-us,-please dept

Thu, Jan 15th 2009 3:15am — Mike Masnick

Harvard Law prof. Charlie Nesson has been leading a case challenging the constitutionality of a core part of the RIAA's continuing lawsuit strategy. Late last year, he asked a judge if the trial itself could be broadcast live over the internet, noting that the RIAA claimed the lawsuits were part of its education campaign, so he couldn't see why they would object. Of course, they did object, but the judge has sided with Nesson, and the court proceedings will be broadcast live next Thursday, January 22nd on the Berkman Center's website. The judge repeated Nesson's points in responding to the RIAA's objection, noting that the RIAA's objection seemed "curious" considering its previous claims of this being an educational campaign. Nesson and his law students had clearly done their homework on the judge. As the article notes, in 2007, the judge (Nancy Gertner) had testified on Capitol Hill on the importance of broadcasting more trials over the internet and television.

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

32 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Twinrova, 15 Jan 2009 @ 3:54am

Will Techdirt...
...provide a stream or link when this glorious day happens?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 6:03am
  
  Re: Will Techdirt...
  You lazy fuck. Just go to the Berkman Center's website on the 22nd AND FIND IT.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Twinrova, 15 Jan 2009 @ 6:24am
    
    Re: Re: Will Techdirt...
    Well, duh, genius.
    
    The request was for those that won't be seeing this blog as it will be well buried on the 22nd.
    
    Of course, the next time I won't think about others. How rude of it was for me suggest the link.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - AJ, 15 Jan 2009 @ 6:26am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Will Techdirt...
      He or she uses 'anonymous' for a reason. Notice the 'civil' discourse, the intelligent thought, the consideration of others that went into his/her post. No need 'educating' others and making their lives a bit easier. Its far more effective to curse and make you feel bad because you asked a simple question. Ah, the joys of internet blogs. Always an a$$hole to help steer the conversation forward...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 7:31am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Will Techdirt...
        while I agree that some anonymous people are rude, not all are.
        
        pleas keep that in mind.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Pseudonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 9:22am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Will Techdirt...
        I'd also like to point out that "AJ" is about as meaningless a name, for our purposes, as "Anonymous Coward."
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        nasch, 15 Jan 2009 @ 10:19am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Will Techdirt...
        So would almost any name, unless it's very very unusual. If I post as Bob Smith, that gives you no more information than "anonymous coward" even if it's my real name.
        
        It's the repeated, consistent and unique use of a name that gives it any meaning in contexts such as these. For example, the name "nasch" tells you nothing about my identity, but I'm the only one using it on this forum. So if you notice me being a dick, or being insightful, or whatever, you can apply that judgment to my future posts.
        
        To make a long story short, if he's the only one going by AJ around here, that's as good as it gets and much better than anonymous coward.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 4:21am

Charlie Nesson "Your my new HERO! Thank you

TAKE THAT RIAA!

Now lets see them go down in a blaze of Humiliation!

Not 1 cent to the RIAA or anyone/everyone whom supports them!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 5:19am

that should be very interesting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Count Porkula, 15 Jan 2009 @ 5:40am

Exactly, #2. I will never buy another CD as long as I live. Further, I've convinced most of my family, friends and co-workers to do the same by showing them the RIAA tactics and that none of their money actually goes to the artists but rather the thugs that make up RIAA (looking especially hard in your direction, Sony).

NEVER PAY FOR MUSIC!!! EVER!!!

Support your favorite bands by going to their concerts and buying their merchandise at the concert. Not by buying their CDs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nasch, 15 Jan 2009 @ 10:26am
  
  Re:
  If you like CDs, by all means buy them - from independent artists. If you want to boycott the RIAA labels, then boycott all their music regardless of format, rather than boycotting a format regardless of the label/artist.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 5:51am

Don't get your hopes up.
Don't get your hopes up for seeing this trial. My guess is that the RIAA will find a reason to drop the case before the first picture flows across the Internet. The RIAA has a history of dropping suits when they think they will lose. They seem to think they will lose whenever they face a serious legal defense. Obviously in this case they are facing a very serious defense team.

Remember, the RIAA's program was never based on strong legal arguments. It was and always has been about using the legal system to shake down poor saps who can't afford to put up a good defense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 5:52am

Not Quite The Same
From the Article: "Trial in the case is scheduled for March 30. Cameras have only been granted for the 2 p.m. Eastern, Jan. 22 hearing."

So we're only seeing the hearing on the 22nd, not the actual trial itself (at least, that hasn't been determined yet). Also, i'm still unclear on exactly how this 'narrowcasting' is going to work. I haven't been able to find anything on their distribution plans, particularly nothing that says 'free' or 'available to everyone.' I'd love to be proven wrong, but...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 5:56am

Views of the live broadcast will be sued by the RIAA. Charlie Nesson, his class and his school will be sued by the RIAA for distributing the copyrighted material that will be presented as evidence in the course of the trail.

Charlie Nesson, his family, his dog and family friends are in the RIAA sites. Maybe the RIAA will sent a group of it's associates to 'meet and greet' them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 6:06am
  
  Re:
  It's SIGHTS not SITES. GAWD!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 6:15am
    
    Re: Re:
    Its GOD, not GAWD! GeeBus Creeps
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - AJ, 15 Jan 2009 @ 6:32am
    
    Re: Re:
    Ah, yes, more valuable input from this troll... glad he/she is driving the conversation forward in such an effective thoughtful manner. What next, napkin tips at dinner?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - nasch, 15 Jan 2009 @ 10:29am
    
    Re: Re:
    Ironic, considering "site unseen" is almost universally mixed up and typed "sight unseen" instead. Basically, given any homophone, it's guaranteed to be used incorrectly at least half the time. :-)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 6:28am

Hooray!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AJ, 15 Jan 2009 @ 6:29am

Wondering...
There is much ballyhoo in the MSM about RIAA not pursuing individual lawsuits anymore. Could this be in anticipation of getting their collective rears kicked in this lawsuit? If I remember correctly, they are switching tactics to bully ISPs into doing their enforcement for them. One can only hope the investigative techniques so called into question, as will be in this lawsuit, will stop them on that front too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Easily Amused, 15 Jan 2009 @ 6:48am

kind of off topic, but it has always bothered me that people still post anonymously here... you don't have to register, no checks are made, you just barf up whatever moniker you want and it takes it. Anyone who can't be bothered to do that probably isn't writing anything intelligent enough to be worth reading.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Easily Amused, 15 Jan 2009 @ 7:32am
  
  Re:
  and yet because no registering is required other people can post under your name.
  
  *for those who don't get it, I am not Easily Amused.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- George Bush, 15 Jan 2009 @ 3:21pm
  
  Re:
  "Anyone who can't be bothered to do that probably isn't writing anything intelligent enough to be worth reading."
  
  I agree 100%.
  
  George Bush
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sean, 15 Jan 2009 @ 7:18am

I think that I will send this into my school newspaper and see if they will print an article on it since the paper is released every Wednesday.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lamerville, 15 Jan 2009 @ 7:30am

For Sale
Can't wait to make bootleg copies of the trial streaming video and sell it on the internet =}
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anon2, 15 Jan 2009 @ 7:34am

could be interesting
This is a hearing on a motion to dismiss, not a trial. But it should prove interesting for those who follow this issue. In a motion to dismiss, there are no factual issues, no evidence, no witnesses, it's pure law. Nesson has some very creative (and in my view, at least some convincing) arguments. The RIAA will be defending its longstanding positions, and from the tone of this order, the judge already seems a bit skeptical of their motives, if not their legal position. Some of the hearing may revolve around technical rules for pleading claims of copyright infringement but I think for the most part the hearing will be about the competing legal theories. If the judge is engaged and prepared, both lawyers will be hammered with questions as they try to persuade the court to adopt their position and reject that of the other side.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TDR, 15 Jan 2009 @ 8:47am

If the RIAA's (il)legal strategies are found in this thing to be unconstitutional, does that mean that criminal charges can then be filed against them and have a real chance of sticking? I wonder...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You never know, 15 Jan 2009 @ 9:01am

Oooooooooo if only I didn't have to work that day. Even if it is just a hearing the case will be high profile. The RIAA will be highly exposed and people will be able to see their faces. It's one thing to lie to the cort and anouther to lie to the public...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shawn Patrick Green (profile), 15 Jan 2009 @ 9:24am

Nesson and poker
I just realized that this is the same Charles Nesson who advocates poker as a skill game, an issue dear to my heart. I work for a poker media company, so having him on our side is a big deal, and I had a lot of respect for him because of his stance. Now that I realize that he's pwning the RIAA, as well, I kinda want to have his babies.

Nesson founded the Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society, which we talked about at my site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2009 @ 10:54am

I never look at online handles.

That's why I never bother to post under one. If a site requires me to register, I just visit less and never post. But I barely post anyway.

This site serves a lot of people. Some are trolling. But using technology to control people's behavior seems to oppose some of the principles this site endorses.

Just because some people misuse something doesn't mean that thing is bad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MA, 15 Jan 2009 @ 1:24pm

RIAA Broadcast
To Tech Dirt thanks for making this more public - your blog was picked up as a link @ dslreports.com. Though I try to read Tech Dirt as often possible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ryan, 16 Jan 2009 @ 3:54pm

Re: Re:
"site unseen"
That's really unusual. I didn't ever realize that "sight unseen" was wrong. I always see it spelled that way but I usually spot those kinds of things. nasch, you are smart.

Thought: a class action lawsuit as countersuit against the RIAA for frivolous lawsuits--including, as class, all those sued to date by the RIAA. we can haz?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]