The audio of the April 8th oral argument before the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum, on the subject of whether an oral argument in the District Court can be streamed online, is now available online, for playing or for downloading.
The argument did not deal with First Amendment issues, but focused on the wording and meaning of the District Court rule, and the legal effect to be accorded the 1st Circuit Judicial Council's 1996 resolution.
The RIAA was represented by Daniel J. Cloherty of Dwyer & Collora.
Amicus curiae CVN was represented by Jonathan Sherman of Boies, Schiller & Flexner.
Joel Tenenbaum was represented by Prof. Charles Nesson.
-MP3 File of April 8, 2009, Oral Argument in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum in 1st Circuit Court of Appeals
-Alternate enhanced volume version ready for download (unofficial-prepared by reader "Alter_Fritz")
-Collection of YouTube Links (unofficial-prepared by Slashdot reader "mariushm")
January 14, 2009, Order and Decision Granting Internet Television Access to January 22nd Oral Arguments
Petition for Writ of Mandamus or Prohibition
Motion for expedited consideration or stay
Case Opening Notice
January 21, 2009, order fixing briefing schedule
Amicus Curiae brief of Electronic Frontier Foundation, Public.Resource.org, Media Access Project, Internet Archive, Free Press, California First Amendment Coalition, and Ben Sheffner
Amicus Curiae Brief of Associated Press, New York Times, Courtroom Television Network, Dow Jones & Co., Gannett Co. Inc., The Hearst Corp., Incisive Media, National Public Radio, NBC Universal Inc., Radio-Television News Directors Association, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, The E.W. Scripps Co., Tribune Co., and Washington Post Digital
Opposition Brief of Joel Tenenbaum
Amicus curiae brief of CVN
RIAA Reply Brief
Order denying motion to submit amicus brief of AP, NYT, Washington Post, and other news organizations
Order granting motion to submit amicus brief by Electronic Frontier Foundation and other organizations
Order granting motion to submit amicus brief by Courtroom View Network
Order staying proceedings in part
Order scheduling April 7, 2009, oral argument in US Court of Appeals for First Circuit
February 20, 2009, Order of US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
First Circuit Notice of Argument
Defendant's Supplemental Brief
RIAA supplemental brief
It is notoriously impossible to predict how an appeals court will rule after hearing the argument.
Being a risk taker here are my predictions as to what the ruling will be:
1. The Judicial Council Resolution is not binding.
2. The District Court rule permits a judge to allow cameras in an appropriate instance.
3. Judge Gertner’s decision to allow a narrowcast of the oral argument in question was within the exercise of a sound judicial discretion and therefore not properly subject to review on a writ of prohibition.
4. Petition denied.
They might or might not articulate standards for the factors to be taken into account by a district court judge in making such determinations.
In dictum they may (a) repudiate the notion that the internet should stand on a different footing than other news media and/or (b) make it clear that their ruling is not a carte blanche grant of authority to televise everything that goes on in this case or in any other case, but is limited to the facts presented.
Commentary & discussion:
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