Incredibly, the proposed jury instructions submitted by plaintiffs in Capitol Records v. Thomas-Rasset ask the Judge to repeat the same mistake he made in the first trial, a mistake which required the Judge to set the verdict aside.
They are asking the Judge to dispense with the definition of a "distribution" that is set forth in 17 USC Sec. 106(3), and instead instruct the jury that the defendant violated plaintiffs' distribution rights if she had the files available on her computer and if MediaSentry downloaded copies of them... without regard to whether
-the plaintiffs prove there was a dissemination of copies;
-the plaintiffs prove that the dissemination was "to the public"; or
-the plaintiffs prove "sale or other transfer of ownership, or ... rental, lease, or lending".
Plaintiffs' Proposed Jury Instructions
It absolutely boggles the mind.
Commentary & discussion:
Copyrights & 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