tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post7096833891038358496..comments2024-03-22T03:28:24.897-04:00Comments on Recording Industry vs The People: DOJ motion to intervene granted, in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Cloudraybeckermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-41036098771995004192009-04-25T13:43:00.000-04:002009-04-25T13:43:00.000-04:00Comment rejected because it recommended illegal ac...Comment rejected because it recommended illegal act.raybeckermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-44736736715417302262009-04-25T02:38:00.000-04:002009-04-25T02:38:00.000-04:00Forgive me if I entertain the notion that the DOJ ...Forgive me if I entertain the notion that the DOJ is deliberately submitting a silly argument to undermine the plaintiffs.Matt Fitzpatrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04198028211898155926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-8130099844261293652009-04-24T19:23:00.000-04:002009-04-24T19:23:00.000-04:00Oh, I know that they are, by law, disqualified fro...Oh, I know that they are, by law, disqualified from having any 'direct' involvement in these cases, but cynic that I am...<br /><br />Don't recall that RIAA lawyers (or any government denizens for that matter)have any real respect for the law unless it suits their purposes and I can only assume that there are 'water coolers' at the DOJ.<br /><br />TomasGAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-45511575847322961982009-04-24T14:45:00.000-04:002009-04-24T14:45:00.000-04:00The DOJ's argument is frivolous, and does not repr...The DOJ's argument is frivolous, and does not represent the law of the land.raybeckermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-20506168749739998842009-04-24T14:38:00.000-04:002009-04-24T14:38:00.000-04:00I find it impossible to defend the idea that disco...I find it impossible to defend the idea that discouraging file-sharing justifies a $150,000 (or even the $750 minimum) penalty when a CRIMINAL conviction on DUI will not likely yield more than a few hundred to a couple of thousand in fines. Is files-sharing really more serious? Does it really need stronger discouragement? I've come to expect outrageous and illogical arguments from the RIAA, but the DOJ should be able to cut through the bull. These statutory damages were never intended to be levied against these types of defendants, even the ones that guilty.<br /><br />lost in thoughtAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-16176158338071535362009-04-24T13:40:00.000-04:002009-04-24T13:40:00.000-04:00Dear Another_Kevin
1. No.
2. If they were inclin...Dear Another_Kevin<br /><br />1. No.<br /><br />2. If they were inclined to intervene there was no need to take an extreme position defending up to $150,000 for a download of a single MP3 file. That wasn't lawyering, that was pandering.<br /><br />3. The statute isn't being attacked wholesale; it's only the RIAA's statutory damages theory, and its interpretation of the statute, that is being attacked.raybeckermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-87167275685498084392009-04-24T13:26:00.000-04:002009-04-24T13:26:00.000-04:00Isn't the DoJ more or less required to defend US s...Isn't the DoJ more or less required to defend US statutes that are attacked in court on Constitutional grounds? I though that was one of the SG's jobs.Another Kevinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04536905148209560945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-80571298714648582002009-04-24T09:49:00.000-04:002009-04-24T09:49:00.000-04:001. The brief they filed consists of the same, not ...1. The brief they filed consists of the same, not very well thought out, material the DOJ filed under the Bush Administration.<br /><br />2. The Jenner & Block RIAA lawyers who joined the DOJ are disqualified from having anything to do with any of the RIAA cases.<br /><br />3. The brief they submitted is completely contrary to controlling law, and will not carry the day, rest assured.raybeckermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-79625694566806997282009-04-24T09:38:00.000-04:002009-04-24T09:38:00.000-04:00Let's see... this is the third case where the DOJ ...Let's see... this is the third case where the DOJ has intervened on the side of the RIAA. <br /><br />Must be wrong thinking on my part to believe that there is a correlation between the interventions and there being, what is it now,6 former RIAA lawyers at Justice.<br /><br />TomasGAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com