In Capitol Records v. ReDigi Judge Richard J. Sullivan, in a ruling delivered from the bench, denied Capitol Records' motion for preliminary injunction.
February 6, 2012, Decision Denying Preliminary Injunction Motion
February 6, 2012, Order Denying Preliminary Injunction Motion
Oral argument February 6, 2012
Commentary & discussion:
Bloomberg News
Hollywood Reporter
Digital Music News
WebPro News
New York Times
CNet
Digital Trends
Wired and Ars Technica
InfoBoom
Slate
Slashdot
Billboard
Extreme Tech
SlashGear
ubergizmo
Computer World
computeractive
Online Media Daily
Nice job, Ray.
ReplyDeleteGood sign to see the judge sees the issues as what they are: issues, and not just noise from the "bad guy".
good news for innovation and the thingies that your copyrightlaw claim to be the purpose of that law:
ReplyDeletewhich are not making obsolete analog times middleman richer and richer but to foster...
(Help me out here Ray, you might know the purposes of your copyrightlaw out of you head and can recite it for us here in a comment) ;-)
Now can this startup company either continue litigating with big music [remember Mr. EMI-VPs statement regarding their entitelment mindset] or we can have a case on the merits of it self.
I bet the EMI guys hadn't seen it coming that this case could become a very important one regarding the rights of consumers in the digital goods age. (maybe as important as SONY was back then in the analog Videocassette times and what that ruling did for consumers?!)
--
A_F
I had a thought.
ReplyDeleteThe feeling of not really owning a copy of downloaded music, even though I've paid for it, is the primary reason I don't buy music that way.
I like buying music on those tangible, shiny discs. I don't like being unable to lend my copy to friends and family. I don't like being unable to sell or donate my copy someday, when I'm done with it.
This case may change my outlook. If Redigi prevails in this case, I just might become iTunes' newest customer.