Tuesday, June 16, 2009

In Tenenbaum Court grants motion to compel re lawyers' uploading song files to internet, denies motion to exclude experts, sets 7/27 trial date

In SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum, the Court has entered an order:

-criticizing defendant's counsel;
-setting firm scheduling dates, including July 20th for a final conference, and July 27th for the trial, and estimating the trial duration at 5 days;
-denying plaintiffs' motion to exclude expert witnesses;
-allowing plaintiffs a deposition of defendant limited to fair use issues;
-allowing defendant written discovery, but no deposition in accordance with defendant's lawyers' statement that they would take no deposition; and
-granting plaintiffs motion to compel discovery into defendant's lawyers' having allegedly uploaded to the internet the song files which are the subject of the lawsuit.

June 16, 2009, Decision denying motion to exclude expert witnesses, granting motion to compel discovery

[Ed. note. I fail to see how Charles Nesson's alleged copyright infringement during the lawsuit is in any way relevant to Joel Tenenbaum's alleged copyright infringement years ago. -R.B.]

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


raybeckerman said...

I would like to know how they got that 11:40 PM email from a government employee.

T2 said...

Hi Ray --- The link to the actual court document is not working. Thank you.

raybeckerman said...

Thanks T2, I fixed it.

Alter_Fritz said...

With all due respect, Judge Gertner you are wrong here.
(but if it is true that Mr. Nesson/defendant has not disputed it you are not to blame)
The blogpost clearly shows that Mr. Nesson copied and pasted email content he got from his students!
The sentence "I've consolidated our seven songs and upped them for your listening displeasure" appeared clearly in an email FROM a student TO Mr. Nesson.
So in my humble opinion it was NOT defendant Tenenbaum nor his counsel Nesson who made "publicly available" anything.