ABA Journal - Law News Now

Comments

• Report Abuse

1. Posted by Iamterriblyvexed - 2 months, 6 days, 13 hours, 20 minutes ago

   1st admin mean anything?
   RIAA wants web page burning.
   Misinformation, ha, Mediasentry sure is that.  Data on a computer is like graffiti, that easy to hack and have whatever there.  Strict scrutiny with that?  BAD!

   ...not yet…

2. Posted by CJT - 2 months, 6 days, 12 hours, 55 minutes ago

   Beckerman’s blog is a fantastic resource for any lawyer defending one of these cases.  The RIAA’s litigation machine is based on bullying defendants with little or no money into settling.  When defendants share information and ideas the RIAA loses some of its power.  Also the significant amount of information on this blog has the potential to reduce defense research costs, something the RIAA needs to keep high so people won’t fight them in court.

3. Posted by mindcrime - 2 months, 5 days, 18 hours, 33 minutes ago

   Did I miss something here?

   Last time I checked, court filings are matters of public record.

   How can it be sanctionable conduct to post matters of public record on the web?

   I smell a rat.

4. Posted by mindcrime - 2 months, 5 days, 18 hours, 27 minutes ago

   However, if you check the rest of the motion, if the allegations therein are true, the blog is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

5. Posted by Dan - 2 months, 5 days, 17 hours, 43 minutes ago

   So, with the recent ruling granting one of the biggest file sharing convicts ever a new trial, the RIAA is desperate. 

   The sooner this illegal racketeering organization (the RIAA) is destroyed the better.

6. Posted by Idaho Lawyer - 2 months, 5 days, 15 hours, 54 minutes ago

   This is just another bully tactic of the RIAA.  I hope RIAA attorney’s get sanctioned, because court records ARE public documents unless the lawsuit is sealed.  RIAA just hates to loose and the Recording Companies instead of dealing with the changing times and making a product people want are simply looking to pad their bottom line through legally enforced extortion.

7. Posted by V - 2 months, 5 days, 15 hours, 31 minutes ago

   F the RIAA

8. Posted by Jim - 2 months, 5 days, 15 hours, 18 minutes ago

   This article is misleading.  The motion only mentions the blog in passing.  The motion is seeking sanctions for intentionally lying in discovery, actively evading service of subpoenas for depositions and intentional destruction of relevant evidence (disposing of the computer at issue).  The recording industry is a behemoth and is over-reacting, but the actions of the defendants and their counsel as described by the motion are clearly criminal contempt.  Click on the hyperlink and read the motion before hopping on your high horse.

9. Posted by sb - 2 months, 5 days, 15 hours, 15 minutes ago

   It amazes me that attorneys would rant like this against the RIAA and the recording industry.  True, they may go overboard on their prosecution tactics, but ask yourselves if you wouldn’t do the same thing if, say, you authored a petition or brief and then another attorney copied the document, signed his name, and got paid for the work.  Or, as a more closely related analogy, you authored a brief for a client, and then the client stole and copied the brief and filed it himself instead of paying you for your work.

   This kind of thing can’t happen as easily with our profession, because we have more control over our work product.  However, by its nature music and movies are placed directly into the public domain.  New technology allows people to create exact copies of high-quality digital media, at a negligible cost.  I agree that the RIAA uses bully tactics, etc., and perhaps if their tactics were more above-board people wouldn’t vilify them as much.  However, copyright laws are in place for the protection and advancement of the arts; if music and movies weren’t protected, then one person would be able to buy a copy and then just distribute it to everyone who wanted one, removing the incentive for artists to produce the recordings in the first place.

   It seems that this issue has polarized a lot of people, when reasonable people should be somewhere in the middle.  As an attorney and a former professional musician, I can appreciate both sides of the debate, and they both appear to be too extreme.

10. Posted by Tom - 2 months, 5 days, 8 hours, 6 minutes ago

    sb - it’s apples and oranges, nobody is trying to take credit for the musician’s work.  Most musicians want as many people as possible to hear their music, and are happy to have their music downloaded for free, it brings people out to their shows.  The RIAA screws musicians, so the “you’re stealing from musicians” argument is a hollow one. 

    The initial reaction of the RIAA to quash filesharing technology was wrong.  They should have been trying to come up with a model where consumers could take advantage of the technology while still compensating artists.  Thank you, Apple.  There are still artificial limitations that prevent people for taking full advantage of the technology, unless they do it illegally.

11. Posted by Lawbert - 2 months, 5 days, 5 hours, 27 minutes ago

    sb has it right, IMHO.  Tom, I’d be interested in checking out a link or source supporting your assertion most musicians want their music downloaded for free—just doesn’t seem plausible.

12. Posted by Jason - 2 months, 2 days, 8 hours, 47 minutes ago

    ?  I don’t get the comparison sb… my briefs and motions get copied and filed all the time.  I e-mail them to people all the time too, just so they can use them.

    Comparing our briefs, motions, etc to music is not the same thing.  What I don’t get, and the RIAA can not seem to answer is this… Where is the crisis?  How many of you as children would wait for a song to come on the radio and hit record?  When I was a kid, I can remember dj’s telling us, get ready, in 3, 2, 1…

    Music will always be copied.  The biggest problem as I see it, is they just need to make it easier for people to legally purchase and use what they purchased.  It is sad to say but a pirate has more freedom to use the music they download, than a purchaser does from say iTunes with restrictive drm

13. Posted by aikanae - 2 months, 2 days, 5 hours, 43 minutes ago

    > ’d be interested in checking out a link or source supporting your assertion most musicians want their music downloaded for free—just doesn’t seem plausible.

    Consider that the MAJORITY of music sold in the U.S. is outside of what RIAA considers “legitimate sales”. That includes all digital sales and direct from musician. The Grammy Awards have been given to over 50% independents independent artists for several years now. That would not have happened a decade ago. Independent labels are one of the fastest growing industries in the U.S.

    Most musicians make money off of live shows, t-shirts, etc. They go into debt making cd’s with RIAA labels and loose their rights to their music, profits from shows etc. Direct from artist sales allows the musician to make money from cd’s as well. Brian Eno and David Bryne just put out a new album on the web for download called “Everything that Happens” and turned away from all major labels.

    For statements, Janis Ian has an excellent site with good links, including to the independent music industry.

    She is not alone. Dick Dale has a UTube video, “Advice to Musicians”, Trent Reznor is offering albums (free) online, Radiohead and Madonna is signing deals for promotions - no record label at all.

    Consider for a moment that the most requested music on P2P is not the current major label hit. For years the most requested has been music that’s 20 years old or more. Even David Bryne posted a statement on his website that he can’t get Warner’s to release Talking Heads music that is out of print (the labels don’t want the competition).

    A lot of the cease and desist letters given online are directed towards out of print and “not commercially viable” music - including if you were the author and copyright owner.

    RIAA is a trade organization. Their primary obligation is to their membership and no one else. That includes musicians.

    It is not the consumers fault that musicians are only paid $.05 out of every dollar spent on ITunes or EMusic. It was not the consumer who developed the mega-star business model.

    The music industry has never been healthier. Instead of a handful of people making billions, there are thousands making a living at it. You just have to know where to look because it won’t be on your radio (RIAA playlists only) and it won’t be on a hit chart or in Billboard or Rolling Stone. And there are bots that drive up hits at places like My Space.

    If your old enough, pretend like it’s the 60’s when the Smothers Bros and Dylan were considered ‘illegal’ for airplay. Culture went underground, only now the laws are made by corporations and trade organizations.

    Canada has had many intelligent debates. L.A. Times published an article from north of the border showing that P2P promoted sales. People bought 30% more cd’s. There’s been several studies showing similar outcomes - by unbiased academics. Even the information U.S. Congress gets from RIAA is flawed. It’s a (bad) joke.

    Even Bush said he downloaded the Beatles along with half of Congress and a Warner exec. Were they sued? WaPo published it back in early 2000-2001. Since when has any college kid had enough money to buy more than a handful of albums, cassettes, cd’s at a time - more than likely those were trades and not “legitimate music sales” that RIAA counts.

    The downloaders are baby boomers replacing their cd’s. Only they have deeper pockets. These lawsuits are using music as a scape goat to affect much bigger issues.

    Sorry for the length. I’ve been following this for some time. Yes I’m in the music biz and yes, I could send you thousands of links for music that the musicians would LOVE to get you to listen to. Most daily newspapers (WaPo, Houston, etc.) have FREE downloads of local bands. You can download what you want from SXSW. Free music is all over. You just have to get past the RIAA sponsored crap.

14. Posted by aikanae - 2 months, 2 days, 5 hours, 30 minutes ago

    P.S. also check out Creative Commons website for more musicians that would love to have you download their music (linked from recording industry v. people website too).

    Chilling Effects website lists some of the cease and desist letters freely handed out.