[PLUG-TALK] Wanna' Help a Lawyer Defend Against the RIAA?
Jeme A Brelin
jeme at brelin.net
Sun Dec 31 11:24:16 UTC 2006
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
-----------------
More information about the PLUG-talk
mailing list