Friday, December 14, 2007

RIAA's inconsistency pointed out to court in random assignment motion in Elektra v. Torres

In Elektra v. Torres, in connection with defendant's request for the Brooklyn RIAA cases to be returned to the usual federal court procedure of random assignment to judges, rather than treated as "related" and always assigned to the same judge, defendant's lawyers have pointed out to the Court how the RIAA's statements in the "surreply" it filed in the Oregon University case -- to the effect that each case is different -- contradict the papers it filed in opposition to the random assignment motion -- to the effect that all the cases are basically the same.

December 12, 2007, Letter of Morlan Ty Rogers to Hon. David G. Trager*
Exhibit A - RIAA surreply in Arista v. Does 1-17*
Exhibit B - Oregon Attorney General reply memo*
Exhibit C - Oregon Attorney General reply affidavit*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation




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






6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Ray,

This filing must have truly pissed the RIAA off today. Just the fact that you can read, within a day of filing, what they're doing on the opposite of the country helps even the playing field a little bit.

Them being stupid doesn't hurt, either.

--ABB

Russell said...

Only a matter of time before the spin caught up with them.

When the facts change depending on the situation, some is going to notice if you do it often enough.

Mark Twain once said to the effect of: "Always tell the truth. That way you don't have to remember what you said."

OTOH, Ralph Waldo Emerson said "Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds"

Who would have thought that the RIAA was into Emerson

Anonymous said...

Russell,

They hate Ralph Waldo Emerson, because he's out of copyright and into the public domain.

Or maybe the love him because he's out of copyright, meaning they can print his works and sell them without owing his estate any royalties.

Mark Twain (Samuel Langhorne Clemens) railed against the copyright system in his later years as Unfair that publishers could profit from his works forever, but he was limited to just 28 years of collecting royalties himself. He wanted to leave a legacy for his family, and tried to beat the system by intending to release "new" versions of his most popular works with author's notes included, such that these "new" improved versions would displace the older ones, yet still be covered by copyright for the full term.

--ABB

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Ray, moderation isn't working too well based on the entry immediately above.

--ABB

Ray Beckerman said...

Moderation was working just fine.

Thing is, I turned it off, as an experiment, so we could have a little more spontaneity.

I guess my experiment didn't work.