Justice Department Increasingly Looking Like The RIAA/MPAA's Legal Team
from the change-the-riaa-can-believe-in dept
It seems that the Obama administration is basically hiring the entire RIAA/MPAA/BSA legal team these days. It started off with the RIAA's favorite lawyer, then it hired the BSA's antipiracy enforcer, and now it's brought on two more of the entertainment industry's favorite lawyers, including Don Verrilli, who was one of the main guys arguing the entertainment industry's side in the infamous (and terribly decided) Grokster case. He also was the guy who argued the RIAA's case that the Jammie Thomas verdict shouldn't be thrown out (on that one, he lost, thankfully). Of course, if you're thinking things would have been any better had McCain won, just note that one of his legal advisors is gleefully cheering on these appointments. Still, as Ray Beckerman notes, Obama's own rules should preclude these guys working on issues related to those they used to represent. We'll see if that actually happens, though.
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: don verrilli, justice department, obama
Companies: mpaa, riaa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Change We Can Count On
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Change We Can Count On
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DOJ
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Surprise, Surprise (not)
Turns out he was "pallin' around with entertainment industry money"... and the industry is now well on its way to getting its pound of flesh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CHANGE!
Change Baby!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes we can...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I see a large dip in public opinion coming
What? You hire cheeseballs, and pretty soon, people think you are one. It's simple fact!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Justice"
In short: If it's got the word "Justice" in the title, there's none to be had there.
Perhaps, if they spelled it "Just us" it would be true, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hope for change, or a book deal.
Wait a second. That's not good!
I guess David Plouffe was a sock puppet!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hope for change, or a book deal.
Obama Coins, T-shirts, Mousepads, Hoodies, Sasha and Malia Dolls, and bumperstickers, Oh my!
http://impeachobamastore.us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hope for change, or a book deal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A bit of optimism
It is pretty common for people to perform their trade in the manner requested by their employer. Yes there is a bit of moral ambiguity in there, but who said lawyers, or anyone for that matter, are for all that is good, just and right?
In other words, it is possible that Obama is selecting the best lawyers for his staff and that staff is expected to forward his agenda, not their own. Obama doesn't appear to be blind to the consumer's side of the issues so far and he is not a pushover, so why would you expect him to take legal advise without consideration of his own position?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A bit of optimism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A bit of optimism
It could be that the very people who came up with the ridiculous legal arguments used by the RIAA are the best choices for countering those arguments. Sure, I think it would have been a much better sign if Obama had put in place more pro-consumer advocates, but time will tell if it's really as bad as we think now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: A bit of optimism
Yeah, I don't think so either, but it's an interesting thought.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A bit of optimism
Obama could be a micromanager, but it would be more logical to just hire people he trusts. I seriously doubt Obama will be guiding the justice department in a direction that contradicts the people in charge of it. That's just not what Presdients do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: A bit of optimism
You mean that's not what presidents used to do. You must not have been paying attention for the last eight years or so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What do you expect?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Deviousness
Not saying that's how it is, just pointing out it could be a truly sweet legal hack.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is stupid
It seems too obvious and brazen for them to use the Justice Department to push for the RIAA/MPAA agendas. Do I think they aren't going to use the Justice Department in some way to forward their agenda? NO, I do not. It's all about pushing agendas in politics and in Washington, how is this any different?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Observations
Mike noted that the Justice Department is being filled with IP protectionists, and have an odd set of previous experience. Taking into consideration that people generally receive appointments on the basis of their previous successes, which can dramatically skew direction of the department as a whole.
But I'm not worried.
Remember this is Government, and Government's larger role is focused on service delivery to the people. In my mind this is what education, security, health care, infrastructure are all about. These remain services that can't be facilitated by private interests, and only government can deliver.
A person would believe that good Government doesn't permit or stand for windfalls which will distort long term plans and create bigger problems down the road. What this requires is private interests own and solve their own problems, and focus more upon innovating their business to satisfy the customer needs, absent of government or legalistic intervention.
Sure, Business crisis are at the forefront right now. But they're all experiencing the same birthing pains. It's just that ours is such a visible and noisy one, and thanks to people like Mike, it seems to be the only one. DoJ is going to have a lot to mop up after the past 8 years of Bush.
Whether it's a local medical/fire emergency or a national economic crisis; we want a "firehouse" whether a real brick and mortar one, or a virtual one like the US Treasury or Justice Department to be able to intervene in the emergency and hopefully mitigate the damage, while also gauging social impact. That's the reality that has been brought home for everyone.
Hopefully these folks realize this, and will focus on their service to The Country, not their previous employers. If not, it will be a short 4 years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Observations
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Observations
National Security, and Interstate Infrastructure, and Federal Law are the business of Federal Government... local security, education, health care, financial security, and local/state infrastructure are NOT the business of federal government. The federal government should protect the interests of the states and citizens, it should not be a service provider.
No government can give (service) anything to anyone without first taking it from someone else. It is very alarming to hear you/people say something so in error as 'education and health care cannot be provided by private interests'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i would have had some _hope_ -- does that word sound familiar? --
that all the people associated with the r.i.a.a. would have such a bad
stink around them that obama would have declined to hire them on
_symbolic_ grounds, if nothing more. so this is very disappointing...
and, as i said, i'll be very attentive to how this plays out down the line.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can't win
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can't win
"the RIAA was the first party they went to after swearing him in"
That was an incorrect report on my part. My daughter had called to let me know that the RIAA was hosting one of the "inaugural balls". I assumed that the Obamas were present at the "inaugural balls". I later learned that it wasn't really an "inaugural ball" at all, it was just a party, and that the Obamas did NOT attend. They only attended the official "inaugural balls".
I corrected the report on my blog but of course couldn't send the correction to everybody who'd heard my incorrect report. Sorry about that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't blame me...
HAHAHAHA gullible 0bamatrons..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Don't blame me...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Optimism and patriotism
"But I'm not worried. Remember this is Government, and Government's larger role is focused on service delivery to the people. In my mind this is what education, security, health care, infrastructure are all about. These remain services that can't be facilitated by private interests, and only government can deliver. A person would believe that good Government doesn't permit or stand for windfalls which will distort long term plans and create bigger problems down the road. What this requires is private interests own and solve their own problems, and focus more upon innovating their business to satisfy the customer needs, absent of government or legalistic intervention. Sure, Business crisis are at the forefront right now. But they're all experiencing the same birthing pains. It's just that ours is such a visible and noisy one, and thanks to people like Mike, it seems to be the only one. DoJ is going to have a lot to mop up after the past 8 years of Bush. Whether it's a local medical/fire emergency or a national economic crisis; we want a "firehouse" whether a real brick and mortar one, or a virtual one like the US Treasury or Justice Department to be able to intervene in the emergency and hopefully mitigate the damage, while also gauging social impact. That's the reality that has been brought home for everyone. Hopefully these folks realize this, and will focus on their service to The Country, not their previous employers. If not, it will be a short 4 years."
I have one thing to say.
I sure hope you're right.
Based on everything I learned in grade school, high school, college, and law school... you are.
Based on what I read in the papers... I'm not so sure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]