Televised RIAA Hearing Adjourned, Briefs Scheduled 72
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "After the lower court adjourned the hearing scheduled to be televised in SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum, in order to give the appeals court time to determine the RIAA's petition for a writ of 'mandamus or prohibition', the appeals court set a briefing schedule. Apparently expecting amicus curiae briefs to be submitted, the appellate court set January 29th as a deadline for filing of amicus briefs. One commentator opines that 'the last thing Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG RIAA attack lawyers want is for people to see them live and in full, glorious color', while another noted Judge Gertner's observation that the arguments raised by the RIAA in the appeals court, relating to the manner of administering the broadcast, had never been raised in the lower court."
Re:mafia enforcers (Score:5, Funny)
Mix tape avoidance plan? (Score:2, Funny)
""Unlike a trial transcript, the broadcast of a court proceedings through the Internet will take on a life of its own in that forum. The broadcast will be readily subject to editing and manipulation by any reasonably tech-savvy individual,""
Oh, I get it now. So, what they're basically saying is, they do NOT want someone to use snippets of RIAA trial lawyers in the courtroom to put together a dance club video mix with a "pumping k-hole groove" [colbertnation.com]. (Cue Stephen Colbert)
Supernatural? (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe the true reason for fighting the televising is that the RIAA lawyers are now so unholy that they can no longer be caught on any type of recording device?
Re:Supernatural? (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe the true reason for fighting the televising is that the RIAA lawyers are now so unholy that they can no longer be caught on any type of recording device?
You might be right. Let me think about that.
Royalty (Score:4, Funny)
I couldn't watch the hearing live anyway... (Score:3, Funny)
But I will be the first to download it!
RIAA are the good guys! (Score:3, Funny)
They also argued that the relationship between CVN, Tenenbaum and Nesson "strongly suggested that the proposed broadcast was not for in furtherance of the public interest, but rather part of a larger strategy to advance defendant's and his counsel's interests in connection with this case."
So... the RIAA are in this for the public good, but Tenenbaum is a greedy grasping malicious dastard who would sell his own grandmother for fifteen cents (US) and a cherry lollipop.
Riiiiiight. And I've got this handy bridge, care to make a bid?
The RIAA are the good guys. You can tell because they say so.
Never Killed Anyone? (Score:5, Funny)
You haven't listened to the new Hannah Montanna CD have you?
But that isn't their problem (Score:3, Funny)
The RIAA's problem is that they don't want to stream it. They want to record it to digital media with DRM and lots of audio effects to make it sound more like they want it to sound, release it on a geographically-based schedule to maximize marketing, and charge a disproportionate price.
Re:But that isn't their problem (Score:3, Funny)
You mean like a Britney Spear's Album?
Re:mafia enforcers (Score:3, Funny)
Sure. The mafia's operations are often highly illegal. They threaten people's lives, and even carry out those threats, which is even worse. Furthermore, they use intimidation, often using the afore-mentioned threats, to strong-arm competitors out of the field.
The RIAA does none of that. They're operation is entirely legal, and, if they have a problem with a person, they don't rely on violence, or threats thereof, in order resolve their disputes. Instead, they use the court system like we are all supposed to when negotiation fails. Also, unlike the mafia, they make all their money from legitimate business that contributes to society around them.
Did that clear things up?
Re:I couldn't watch the hearing live anyway... (Score:1, Funny)
Gosh no! That's the same as copyright infringement; everyone knows that.
Re:Massachusetts rules? (Score:4, Funny)
Basically, the Massachusetts rules say that courtroom proceedings may be broadcast if they fall into certain categories "or by order of the court", which is generally taken to mean that the court can allow other proceedings to be broadcast at it's discretion. The RIAA wants to read that rule as "and by order of the court", limiting the court to allowing broadcasting only of the categories specified. Also, when the RIAA appeals to the rules of the Judicial Conference, it glosses over the fact that the Judicial Conference has no authority to dictate rules to the courts under it and that no court under it has actually adopted it's proposed prohibition on broadcasting proceedings.
Yeah well the RIAA lawyers tore those pages out of the law books.