Wednesday, January 10, 2007

RIAA Cites Child Pornography Case to Judge in Elektra v. Barker; Barker Says Case is Irrelevant

In Elektra v. Barker, in which oral argument of Ms. Barker's dismissal motion has been scheduled for January 26th, the RIAA has cited to Judge Karas a child pornography case which it claims is relevant to the pending dismissal motion. Ms. Barker's attorneys argued to the Judge that the case is totally irrelevant:

January 9, 2007, Letter of Richard L. Gabriel, with copy of US v. Shaffer*
January 10, 2007, Letter of Morlan Ty Rogers, with copy of RIAA's November 15, 2004, testimony to FTC P2P File Sharing Workship*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:

TechDirt
p2pnet.net

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

7 comments:

dave said...

You have to admire the RIAA persistence but a fine return of serve made.

Love - 15 I think.

P.S. At the risk of being slapped with a suboena "What's love got to do with it?"

Alter_Fritz said...

"Stop! In the name of love"
:-)

Alter_Fritz said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Stop-supremes-1965.ogg

BasicTek said...

This realy sucks. Some technology illiterate judge makes an incorrect ruling to punish a kiddy porn @sshole, and the RIAA can use that against P2P noobs. Gotta luv the american court system.

Ray Beckerman said...

BasicTek said..."This realy sucks. Some technology illiterate judge makes an incorrect ruling to punish a kiddy porn @sshole, and the RIAA can use that against P2P noobs. Gotta luv the american court system."

Why are you blaming the court system for something Richard Gabriel did? Blame Richard Gabriel for what Richard Gabriel does.

Judge Karas is much too smart to buy such nonsense.

In the Barker case itself the Department of Justice has specifically stated to Judge Karas that it has NEVER prosecuted anyone under the copyright act for "making available". See US Dept of Justice Statement of Interest, p 5, fn 3.

Ray Beckerman said...

Someone posted an off-topic post asking for legal advice. I deleted it, as that is not the purpose of this blog.

Anonymous said...

Just wondering, If anyone has considered, that when government employees, (Inadventantly Shared) our Nations Classified Documents over P2P file sharing networks, that it is the same as Distributing, and therefore,They should all be charged with Treason.
If the RIAA, are trying to get the courts to rule that this Default setting is done Intentionally.