Wednesday, June 24, 2009

In Tenenbaum Prof. Nesson files 'response' to order, & court schedules hearing on deft's motion to compel pltffs to respond to interrogs

In SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum, the Court has scheduled a June 29th hearing on defendant's motion to compel the plaintiffs to respond to the outstanding interrogatories, and Prof. Nesson has filed a "response" to the Court's June 16th order.

Docket entry for hearing:

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Hearing on Motion [852] MOTION to Compel Plaintiffs to Respond to Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories: Motion Hearing set for 6/29/2009 09:30 AM in Courtroom 2 before Judge Nancy Gertner. (Molloy, Maryellen)

"Response" of Charles Nesson to June 16th order

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


Alter_Fritz said...

link does not work

raybeckerman said...

Only because I forgot to upload the document.

Now it's working fine.

Sorry about that.


Unknown said...

Is this normal litigation practice?
It seems a bit odd

Alter_Fritz said...

no problem Ray, and no need to say sorry.
To the contrary, I (resp. we the public) have to say "thanks" for all your efforts to shed the lights on all the stuff that the labels are doing for all those years now.


jr said...

I think like a lot of things in this case Sebastien this is a bit odd....

Unknown said...

This document appears to have been somewhat hastily written. Take, for example, the switch from "I" to "i" partway through.

While I respect Dr. Nesson’s credentials and his lectures, this is one of several times I have wondered if his client is not being well served by his presentation (not, specifically, the intent).

Anonymous said...

Is the lower case pronounc"i" supposed to represent some humility on Charlie's part?

Or does punctuation, along with other rules of gravity, not apply when he is Counsel?

"i would like to make it possible for the world to follow this case. i would like every citizen interested in the future of the
net to follow the trial, hear the arguments, listen to the songs at issue, experience the witnesses, deliberate the issues, and learn the law as i believe it can and should be taught and as i do my best to teach it."

shane said...

I didn't realize that Prof. Nesson didn't have the backing of the Berkman Center. I had assumed he had full resources at his disposal and I'm sorry to hear that he does not. The RIAA has a rather extensive factory for litigation and, it seems to me, no ethical qualms about using it to advance counterfactual claims and estopped arguments, but they they have the salesman's friend, "Volume, volume, volume!!!"

While I've found KAD Camera's motions to be excellent on those points he chose to make, Professor Nesson's have been curious to me, often making grand points that seem to exceed the scope of the issues before the court rather than law the court can act on. In this "response" he seems to have literally stopped dotting his "i's" and crossing his "t's." I still hope fervently the case goes well, and many things have been wrongly decided against him, but this litigation hasn't gone the way I would have expected. It is hard to know what to think.

SteelWolf said...

The Tenenbaum case seems to be our very own US "spectrial." It seems like it will only precedent-setting if the RIAA wins, which is unfortunate.

Anonymous said...

Though this response, or whatever it is, may irritate the judge, it should once again show her that the financial playing field is far from level. Will she recognize that that is unfairly hurting Tenenbaum?