tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post6503525849103020947..comments2024-03-22T03:28:24.897-04:00Comments on Recording Industry vs The People: RIAA makes numerous in limine motions in Capitol Records v. Thomas-Rassetraybeckermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-81174972033606076682009-06-03T12:16:40.437-04:002009-06-03T12:16:40.437-04:00Dr. Kim does not offer a single probability, only ...<i>Dr. Kim does not offer a single probability, only <b>theoretical possibilities</b> for which there is <b>no evidence</b></i><br /><br />Hm... interesting. I can fix that for you:<br /><br />[The RIAA] does not offer a single probability [of distribution/copying], only theoretical possibilities for which there is <b><i>no evidence</i></b>.<br /><br />QAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-74159416907796524572009-06-03T00:42:53.742-04:002009-06-03T00:42:53.742-04:00Nohwhere Man:
As you say. If the RIAA expert is ...Nohwhere Man:<br /><br />As you say. If the RIAA expert is making false claims, Defendant's expert witness can and should point those out. In that event, the RIAA's expert witness would have little credibility.<br /><br />My summary:<br /><br />RIAA expert: "X is impossible."<br />Defendant expert: "X is possible."<br />RIAA expert: "X didn't happen."<br />Defendant expert: "You claimed it was impossible, and now you're only claiming it didn't happen ... sounds like you were just wrong and now wanna cover it up. Are you really an expert?"<br /><br />*yt*Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-36483404086719764012009-06-02T21:41:55.665-04:002009-06-02T21:41:55.665-04:00Are you ever going to make your blog non-insulting...Are you ever going to make your blog non-insulting to the eyeballs? Some aesthetics please...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-76968559936996097972009-06-02T20:31:00.692-04:002009-06-02T20:31:00.692-04:00I usually have trouble reading the RIAA's briefs, ...I usually have trouble reading the RIAA's briefs, so I didn't finish the Dr Kim one, however... isn't the point of using an qualified expert to testify on things that <I>could</I> happen, not just about the uncontested facts of the case? Part of being an expert is the ability to offer such an opinion.Nohwhere Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05311432334209158781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-84285296662665117612009-06-02T12:42:18.574-04:002009-06-02T12:42:18.574-04:00Yes, A_F, can you imagine how that would be for th...Yes, A_F, can you imagine how that would be for the RIAA? They would not be able to mention how other people have probably committed copyright infringement, therefore the defendant should be punished for that?<br /><br />I fully expect Judge Davis to preclude BOTH sides from referring to anything outside THIS CASE.raybeckermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-70262619016552074912009-06-02T12:33:43.434-04:002009-06-02T12:33:43.434-04:00Yes Ray, I was wondering too about this "no other ...Yes Ray, I was wondering too about this "no other cases mentioning, please!"-thingy this time.<br /><br />Does it mean THIS time RIAA-Gary, RIAA-Mitch the misspeaking Miss Pariser and co. will not testify how allegedly bad all those p2p combined is for them?<br /><br />Will we only hear about 24 songs and how that would have damaged the rightsowners of those 24 x 99ct iTunes license fee in case defendant actually did not acquired licenses for those songs legally?<br /><br />Now what a boring trial will this be then! *sarcasm*Alter_Fritzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10861406779872744163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-86304066059126631582009-06-02T11:26:23.910-04:002009-06-02T11:26:23.910-04:00Evidence #6 "Screenshots of defendants shared fold...Evidence #6 "Screenshots of defendants shared folder"<br /><br />Hahahahahahahahahaha<br /><br />How do they manage to screw these things up that badly. This is clearly a screenshot of the plaintiffs/MS computer after searching on the username that is in theory linked to defendant. It is most defiantly *NOT* a screenshot of the defendant's computer's shared folder.<br /><br />Either the evidence should be thrown out and rule 11 sanctions applied ... or.. the defendant should use them to their advantage. I think the jury might be interested in the status bar text "Not sharing any files"<br /><br />OopsErichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07719707203372377982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-24163428882380814212009-06-02T11:17:49.153-04:002009-06-02T11:17:49.153-04:00"can" be used?
It certainly can, and probably wil..."can" be used?<br /><br />It certainly can, and probably will, be used.<br /><br />The MediaSentry evidence and the Jacobson is flagrantly inadmissible under Daubert.raybeckermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-81226605861576032382009-06-02T11:04:22.503-04:002009-06-02T11:04:22.503-04:00Normally evidence outside the scope of the issues ...Normally evidence outside the scope of the issues to be litigates should be prevented, but not when it show a clear patten that bears on the case.<br /><br />I don't understand why Dr Kim would be prevented. The RIAA's motion is absurd on it's face since isn't it always the defenses prerogative to offer alternate explanations of the "evidence" to the jury!? Dr Kim's expert testimony would clearly fall into that category.<br /><br />RIAA better be very careful attacking the defendant with daubert as it can easily be used on MS evidence as well. If attacked their entire litigation strategy could come falling down because no reasonable expert should stand behind this black box "evidence".Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07719707203372377982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-53312497012460474812009-06-02T10:52:47.990-04:002009-06-02T10:52:47.990-04:00IncredibleIncredibleAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com