Tuesday, July 28, 2009

I'm not commenting on the SONY v. Tenenbaum trial any more

As far as I'm concerned the key triable issues of fact in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum are mentioned in my blog post, My wish list for the SONY v Tenenbaum trial".

The Judge's allowing jury selection to go awry, and allowing all sorts of irrelevant material to be adduced in opening statements and in direct testimony, saddens me.

I'm not going to comment any further on this case; I will just hope that the correct points are eventually touched upon, and that the case will be decided upon the law and the facts, which at this point seems highly unlikely.


Commentary & discussion:


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


Shane said...

Seems to me that this might be one of those teachable moments, where you as an expert litigator in the regular world can point out just how bizarre the current trial is. As a non-lawyer, your personal opinions on these cases have been very helpful in explaining the significance and exceptional nature of various actions in these proceedings.

Oh, and without you my only source of legal opinion on this case will be Ars Technica, who has hired Copyright Maximalist IP Attorney, and RIAA defender, Ben "I've never had a substantive disagreement with the RIAA's litigation factory" Sheffner as their correspondent for this case!!!!!!

Please, please don't let Ben be my only source of legal opinion on the details of this case as they unfold!!!

bbsux said...

Do you mean you're not going to post any more info on it all all?
Or that are you not going to "comment" on it and still post the info?

If we don't at least put the info out there then the RIAA gets what they want...

Regardless of the rather strange and seemingly stupid stuff happening I still think we should get the info out there.

WITH the proper disclaimer -- something like "DO NOT DEFEND YOUR CLIENT LIKE THIS".

Is it just me, or shouldn't someone who is teaching law have to have actually practiced law??

Prof Nesson acts like he has never set foot in a courtroom and even the non-lawyer public think his arguments are crazy!

David Donahue said...

I for one, would have liked to hear each irrelevant point torn apart and dissected and hear why a bad jury ended up being selected, but I really understand where you're coming from.

It's really disheartening to see justice go awry and be powerless to stop it.

It's kind of like watching a speeding train go towards a cliff, you feel forced to watch but you don't want to see anything bad happen, so you send help hints to the conductor, you shout and cry out ineffectually but still it speeds on.

I don't want to a see a disaster, but think I can get away with watching just a little bit longer before I turn away. I think Ray is both closer and more experienced and to see him turn away says much for the slim chance of a positive outcome here.

I may just close my eyes too now. Maybe we can learn something from the trail and help the survivors (if any).

Anonymous said...

I think I have idea of the frustration you have with the case so far. Even as a non-Lawyer I am amazed that this case is all about the big music labels' loss of revenue instead of being about Joel Tannenbaum and the issues with suing individuals as a business model. Something tells me that after this case the RIAA will no longer refrain from going after Harvard students.