[PLUG-TALK] Wanna' Help a Lawyer Defend Against the RIAA?

[Jeme A Brelin]

On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> Yeah, I remember the arguments. I don't much care one way or another -- 
> I don't fileshare and I don't buy 90 percent of the material published 
> that people *do* fileshare. If there were a thriving "black market" in 
> performances of the Shostakovich 11th symphony,
[snip]

The problem here, Ed, is that you're perpetuating the propaganda by using 
terms like "black market" and "copyright violation".  If you don't care, 
don't let your language take sides.  Just a suggestion...

> Yes, I'm in violent agreement here. It should have been thrown out of 
> court because from what I saw, someone else was using the machine. But 
> that "someone else" has no right to expose Ms. Lindor to a lawsuit by 
> such behavior, legal or illegal.

In the end, I think it'll be a good thing.

> Assuming of course that she wins. All the way up the chain to the 
> Supreme Court. Think about it -- think about what's required for her to 
> win. I'm not talking about getting the suit dismissed. I'm talking about 
> a *victory* -- overturning a piece of legislation. Do you really think 
> she has a chance?

Well, this is a civil suit.  The plaintiff is the RIAA, not the state.  We 
don't need to overturn legislation.  We just need a simple precedent 
showing that their suit is spurious, frivolous and stupidous.  With such a 
decision (dismissal or otherwise), future claims by the RIAA can be met 
with countersuits since they know presumably know that their claims are 
unsupportable.

J.
-- 
    -----------------
      Jeme A Brelin
     jeme at brelin.net
    -----------------