RIAA, the group perhaps most singly responsible for turning music fans against the major labels, is currently suing a young man who is being defended, in part, by a Harvard professor.
In an attempt to shed some light on the absurd arguments RIAA uses to make their case, the defendants requested that the court allow the trial to be webcast live.
Tenenbaum’s attorneys had sought the Webcast, arguing that streaming the hearing would allow the public to effectively attend the trial. The record industry opposed the request on the grounds that the publicity could prejudice a potential jury pool.
Gertner last week discounted the RIAA’s arguments, noting that the organization repeatedly said it sued non-commercial file swappers in order to generate publicity that would dissuade others from sharing music. Her order authorized the Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society to host the streams.(via)
Now the trial has been delayed as RIAA appeals this decision.
Let’s review, shall we. RIAA claims that these trials should be a warning and deterent to other file-sharers but they don’t want anyone to actually be able to watch the trial. That makes a ton of sense.
If the major labels want any chance to survive in the digital age they need to reign in RIAA and start treating their potential customers as partners instead of pirates.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Judge OKs webcast in RIAA music file-sharing case
- Judge calls RIAA objections “specious,” will stream hearing
- Legendary Harvard law prof fights constitutionality of RIAA lawsuits
- Harvard Law Professor Fights Back Against RIAA
- Harvard professor launches attack against music copyright law
- RIAA: Two Faces Have I?
- Groundbreaking Ruling Allows Hearing to Be Webcast
- RIAA Scared of Court Case Webcast