FSF Files Amicus Brief In RIAA Case 73
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The Free Software Foundation has requested permission to file
an amicus curiae brief in an RIAA case, SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum, defending the defendant's Due Process defense to the RIAA's claim for statutory damages. In the brief [PDF], FSF cites some of the leading authorities for the defense, including the 2003 decision of the US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit in Parker v. Time Warner, which held that excessive statutory damages are subject to the same due process test applicable to punitive damage awards by juries. Additionally, the brief cites three district court decisions, including UMG v. Lindor, and two law review articles — all of which deal specifically with Copyright Act statutory damages applicable to infringement of an MP3 file — to like effect."
Focusing too much on the minutia? (Score:4, Insightful)
I understand slashdot's obsession with the RI...really I do. But, don't you think stories like this that aren't really even news are getting a little too much attention? There is no decision, no new case, no new theory--not even the filing of an amicus curiae brief, just a petition to file an amicus curiae brief. Next we'll be hearing what the lawyers are eating for lunch.
Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course this is where you attempt to find some reason why shit you're posting still matters, the whole while thinking the echo chamber you live in in representative of reality.
RIAA is a joke, and you're an even worse joke for wasting so much time posting trivial shit about them that no one who isn't a total loser cares about.
Wow, you run out of Prozac or something? If you don't like what the guy posts then don't read it, or better yet don't waste your time and anger commenting on it.
Sheesh!
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
My grandmother's computer got rooted by Sony.
My cousin got extorted freshmen year of college.
We all need to care about the RIAA.
They will die naturally in 10 years ; but, we
need to help the process along.
GuloGulo, I hope your mother doesn't get rooted
by Sony.
Re: (Score:1)
Forgot to check "Post Anonymously" box? :)
Re: (Score:1)
No one cares about your personal cause anymore. It's not 2001. No one gives a shit about irrelevant-to-their every day lives legal wrangling, shit guy.... *snip* And finding a few slashtards to agree with you doesn't mean you're right, it means you've lost perspective.
And flaming people for liking certain stories and trying to speak for everybody (when it is obvious they don't like it) isn't? You fucking hypocritical nitwit.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This *stuff* lives and dies by the minutiae. Good to see that the court gets plenty o'reasons to look at the precedents. Could save some fees.
Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? (Score:5, Insightful)
The outcome of this case affects, indirectly, whole industries surrounding recorded music and video, and the software industry as well. Being a software engineer, I, for one, am VERY interested in any news surrounding this case.
I will admit that this does not reflect a new decision, or other outcome. But that doesn't mean that it's "not news".
Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? (Score:5, Interesting)
Analogy (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Analogy (Score:5, Funny)
it may not be the end of the movie but the tide of the war may be turning, and it's a part you probably don't want to miss.
Can we all go charging down the mountain side while the light of dawn streams down from behind us (although NYCL might look a bit odd leading the charge in white robes on a white horse)?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? NOOOO (Score:3, Insightful)
No I don't! The RIAA and MPAA are trying their mightiest to bring down the free exchange of ideas, knowledge, and data that we enjoy over the Internet as well as (with the help of Microsoft and Apple lackeys) control what you can and cannot do on your own personal computer. If you think this is some far off battle on some arcane legal minutiae that will never touch your own life, you are so wrong that t
Re: (Score:2)
That isn't entirely on topic... But you surely are missing the big picture here, and ignoring the reality of who is using who.
Just to be short, Microsoft and Apple have everything to gain here, while RIAA people are a bunch of fools.
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Next we'll be hearing what the lawyers are eating for lunch.
No need to report that, it's still the little people...
Re: (Score:1)
In Deep-Ones America, Cthulhu eats YOU!
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
This just in: lawyers eating children for lunch.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure which will happen first... (Score:4, Funny)
...will there be an end to these suits which were claimed to have been stopped long ago or...
Will I be able to cause all of their heads to explode using the powers of my mind?
Yay!!! (Score:3, Funny)
NewYorkCountryLawyer (Score:1, Insightful)
Why don't add a brief summary about what your posts actually mean to the non-legal types, rather than this legalese summary each time?
Re:NewYorkCountryLawyer (Score:5, Insightful)
Because he's a practicing attorney and doesn't have the time to break every event down into simple terms (that's what Groklaw is for). I'm sure he would if he could, but that's the way it is.
I'm glad he does this, though, at least then we're made aware of happenings and can then go find further information about it.
Re: (Score:2)
While I do agree he is helping - a bit of translation for those of us who aren't native English speaking (nor understand US legal system) would very much be appreciated.
Re:NewYorkCountryLawyer (Score:4, Informative)
While I do agree he is helping - a bit of translation for those of us who aren't native English speaking (nor understand US legal system) would very much be appreciated.
I'm sorry but my priority has to be get the unvarnished facts out there. If I start watering stuff down, I'm afraid I'll start describing things incorrectly. And to me it seems that the most important role I can play is to report the news, and get the litigation documents online.
Re:NewYorkCountryLawyer (Score:5, Interesting)
Because those of us who have been following along with the RIAA and MPAA and Pirate Bay and Microsoft and Psystar and the EFF and Apple and AT&T and Verizon and Comcast and every other technologically relevant entity who can hire a lawyer and a PR person has now given us a basic understanding of the way these cases work.
Ray may have already helped me skip the first year of law school, just because of the sheer volume of information he has provided to the /.ers who have been paying attention. If you're new here, read his blog archives and get an idea of what he's already contributed to the community.
--The FNP
P.S. I apologize for feeding the A.C., but I've got Karma to burn.
Re: (Score:2)
There was nothing in the summary that would be confusing to anyone who paid attention during their high school civics class, and who reads a newspaper semi-regularly.
Sigh (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
It is the lawyers who have been scamming a desperate RIAA, which keeps hoping they will come through with big wins eventually. (Suckers!)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
A little off topic, but I wonder what if anything the RIAA actually has accomplished from all these years of lawsuits. People hate them, is the money coming in at all?
They've accomplished absolutely nothing except:
1. enriching their lawyers and
2. bringing 4 record companies closer to obsolescence.
Re: (Score:2)
The RIAA doesn't depend on being liked by people. It's purpose is to give the various record companies a bit of anonymity and plausible deniability. Most people who see RIAA don't think of this as action by, say, Sony. And the companies can always say that their agent mishandled a case if they *do* happen to get associated with it.
The RIAA *exists* to do things that the record companies wouldn't want associated with their names.
Re: (Score:2)
The RIAA doesn't depend on being liked by people. It's purpose is to give the various record companies a bit of anonymity and plausible deniability....The RIAA *exists* to do things that the record companies wouldn't want associated with their names.
Interesting theory. How's the plan working for them? Is there a soul out there who doesn't know that it's the 'Big 4' record companies (EMI, Universal, SONY, Warner)?
Re: (Score:2)
Indefensible! (Score:3, Funny)
"defending the defendant's Due Process defense"
This sentence construction is indefensible!
Re: (Score:2)
"defending the defendant's Due Process defense"
This sentence construction is indefensible!
I throw myself on the mercy of the court.
Oldies but goldies.. (Score:2)
You're OK, you haven't quite reached the bottom yet:
http://www.lawschoolbound.net/TO/humor2.htm [lawschoolbound.net]
Q. When he went, had you gone and had she, if she wanted to and were able, for the time being excluding all the restraints on her not to go, gone also, would he have brought you, meaning you and she, with him to the station?
MR. BROOKS: Objection. That question should be taken out and shot. :-)
Why the FSF? (Score:2)
It's nice to see someone go to the effort to file an amicus brief, but why the FSF? Excessive statutory damages for copyright infringement doesn't necessarily seem like something that's in their area of interest (i.e., I can't see how it affects software freedom one way or another). Or is it simply a lawyer at the FSF who happens to be interested? Do organizations often file these kinds of briefs in areas that the organization isn't primarily interested?
Re:Why the FSF? (Score:4, Informative)
The FSF is working with The Recording Industry vs. the People to provide an Exper Witnesses Fund. Basically, they're providing computer experts to combat the misinformation spouted by the RIAA concerning technology.
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/11/expert-witness-defense-fund-for-riaa.html [blogspot.com]
https://www.fsf.org/associate/riaa [fsf.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The FSF is working with The Recording Industry vs. the People to provide an Expert Witnesses Fund. Basically, they're providing computer experts to combat the misinformation spouted by the RIAA concerning technology.
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/11/expert-witness-defense-fund-for-riaa.html [blogspot.com]
[fsf.org] https://www.fsf.org/associate/riaa [fsf.org]
Well they don't actually supply the experts. They've administered a separate fund, the Expert Witness Defense Fund, the purpose of which is to provide funds to the defendants with which to hire their own technical experts and/or consultants. The fund has provided financial support to the UMG v. Lindor case, and to the Capitol v. Thomas case.
Re: (Score:2)
If the period of the copyright were reduced to 30 seconds then the GPL would effectively be the same as the BSD.
Thinking of this as an Evolutionarily Stable Strategies match, however, I map BSD onto Dove*, Proprietary onto Hawk**, and GPL onto Retaliator***. (Note that Proprietary onto Hawk isn't a good mapping, because Proprietary has numerous different shadings all the way from a Dove that hides to a patent troll...which I haven't been able to map into the scenario.) Given that this is a rather loose ma
Re: (Score:2)
Because Tenenbaum's lawyer *royally* screwed up the appeal and failed to cite the most salient case law.
Thankfully, the FSF stepped in to fill in the gaps that were missed.
Re:Why the FSF? (Score:5, Informative)
As an organization dedicated to the rights of computer users and their interaction with copyrighted works, we are concerned with the RIAA's attempt to redefine copyright law through legal proceedings against individuals who are generally unable to defend themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
I think they pretty well explained their interest in the case when they said:
As an organization dedicated to the rights of computer users and their interaction with copyrighted works, we are concerned with the RIAA's attempt to redefine copyright law through legal proceedings against individuals who are generally unable to defend themselves.
Ray, do you think that the redefinition of copyright law may be the real goal of the RIAA, MPAA and other organizations of their ilk? You and others have occasionally said that the ill-will that is being created cannot possibly be balanced by the monetary payoff. If there is no monetary payoff, there must be an intangible payoff, and the erosion and elimination of user's rights could be an immediate goal. Thinking a little further, taking control of peoples' systems and turning it over to the cartels cou
Re: (Score:2)
Ray, do you think that the redefinition of copyright law may be the real goal of the RIAA, MPAA and other organizations of their ilk? You and others have occasionally said that the ill-will that is being created cannot possibly be balanced by the monetary payoff. If there is no monetary payoff, there must be an intangible payoff, and the erosion and elimination of user's rights could be an immediate goal. Thinking a little further, taking control of peoples' systems and turning it over to the cartels could have an enormous, if not unlimited, long-term payoff. The thought of root-kitting creeps like these being in control of everything is scary stuff. Glad I've been supporting the FSF.
There's no doubt in my mind that that rewriting the copyright law is one of their objectives, as part of their overall strategy of defeating the internet until they can subjogate it to their own monopolistic practices. And it will be interesting to see what the Obama administration -- now packed with RIAA lawyers at the highest level -- will have to say in this case. Are they going to take the legal position, as they did under George Bush -- that smacking teenagers with 'statutory damages' of $750 to $150,0
True Irony Alert! (Score:4, Interesting)
Estoppel is the word that first comes to mind here.
Re:True Irony Alert! (Score:4, Informative)
There is some true irony here as one of the Plaintiffs in this case who is arguing that such damages shouldn't be limited to a single-digit ratio of actual damages, argued (and won) in an Appeals Court case when they were the Defendant that such damages should be so limited.
Yes, when UMG Recordings was a defendant [blogspot.com] it was crying a very different tune. All of a sudden the Constitution counted, and 'deterrence' wasn't so important.
Psst! want a rootkit? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"The EFF or some other organization SHOULD be filing an amicus brief. But not me... I'm just some guy." Ray Beckerman (on Groklaw)
Glad to see you changed your mind Ray.
Thanks, but the brief was filed on behalf of an organization... the Free Software Foundation. I was just one of the lawyers.