In SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum, Judge Gertner issued an order denying defendant's motion to compel the deposition of Matthew Oppenheim, and suggesting that the motion was frivolous.
Order denying motion to compel deposition of Matthew Oppenheim
Commentary & discussion:
Excess Copyright
Copyrights and Campaigns
p2pnet.net
Popehat
Legal Blog Watch
Chronicle of Higher Education
Copyrights and Campaigns
Keywords: lawyer digital copyright law online internet 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 intellectual property portable music player
I wonder whether the Judge will allow for any Rule 30(b)6 witness for the RIAA in these proceedings, or whether Tenenbaum's legal team will defend against an accuser without a face. At this point, I cynically suspect that the RIAA could put Oppenheim forward as their 30(b)6 designate, concurrently claim privilege, and leave Tenenbaum with nobody to depose, without the Judge batting an eyelash.
ReplyDeleteHas our legal system of justice gone to "the dark side"?
ReplyDeleteOldphart in Kansas
So the deposition is frivolous but the whole lawsuit isn't?
ReplyDeleteTrav,
ReplyDeleteExcellent, and very pithy, point.
{The Common Man Speaking}
IANAL, so would someone please translate what happened here.
ReplyDeleteTenenbaum wanted to ask Oppenheim questions, but the judge said "No, because it's against the rules."
What are the rules?
Thanks,
Randy
Honestly, someone should provide this Judge with a laptop, Internet connection and a desktop shortcut to this blog. Sounds like he's misinformed, about a number of things.
ReplyDelete