tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post6834376567465728209..comments2024-03-22T03:28:24.897-04:00Comments on Recording Industry vs The People: Tenenbaum files motion for reconsideration and motion to be permitted late filingraybeckermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-49736373016345308442009-03-13T23:24:00.000-04:002009-03-13T23:24:00.000-04:00Hopefully, after the backhand by the RIAA geniuses...Hopefully, after the backhand by the RIAA geniuses she grant both motions.<BR/><BR/>TomasGAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-11198609317410489282009-03-13T18:06:00.000-04:002009-03-13T18:06:00.000-04:00Yes sounds like a very strong argument indeed.Now ...Yes sounds like a very strong argument indeed.<BR/><BR/>Now Prof. Nesson needs to pray that his motion for permission to file late is granted.raybeckermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-23412053386930984252009-03-13T18:00:00.000-04:002009-03-13T18:00:00.000-04:00Well, this is interesting. Tenenbaum says the 1996...Well, this is interesting. Tenenbaum says the 1996 Judicial Council resolution was never given a public comment period or disseminated to the public, as required by Congress, and is, thus, invalid. Sounds like a strong argument against the resolution. And, indeed, is congruent with the fact that nobody, not the judge, not the amici, not the plaintiffs nor the defense had ever heard of the 1996 Judicial Council resolution. Were the resolution to be held valid it would be akin to allowing secret lawsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com