Have the phone conversation with her, record it for your personal review, and then back it up with an email to her, saying:
“as per our phone conversation, you said, “blah blah blah”.

The thing is, the NCSC only cares about court administration. The actual laws don’t matter to them. It’s not their thing. While it’s certainly possible that someone high up received some money from the RIAA, I would seriously doubt it. It’s more a lack of knowledge about the subject area. They just don’t know any better and so are fine parroting the general, yet false, stance seen in the media. It’s also a sign of over-reliance on outside consultants, something the Managing Editor of the comic book was notorious for. (The other one, not Lorri.)

But, part of a vast RIAA conspiracy? Not knowingly.

Admittedly, if it weren’t for the fact that I used to work there and know the people involved, I’d think it was a RIAA plot as well. They really really screwed up on it.

But, keep in mind, this is one product out of dozens that they produce. You never see the other products because it’s all court administration stuff and most people find it really boring.

E-Mail is forever.

She wants the phone for ‘deniability’ purposes.
If it’s not in cold hard print, it never happened. it’s just
he said, she said. Print is proof, print can’t be denied.

These people live by lies.

The goal was to give the public an inside look at courts, not cases. The cases are just the storyline, if that makes sense. That was the idea; whether it was duly executed…that’s another storyline.

Jon, if you want a physical copy, without sending in $1.50, I have a few I grabbed at a conference. I’d be happy to send you one.

And don’t be mean to Lorri. (I’m not saying you have been.) She’s nice and it’s not her fault. If you want a name, it’s the one right above hers on the inside cover. But he’s not there anymore.

Cheers!

I would think that a phone conversation would be more accurate. In print, confusion often arises over whether a person is being serious or joking. Or even what a particular phrase might mean. When you’re talking with someone on the phone, you can listen to the tone of their voice and ask for clarification.

You’re right. She wanted to talk on the phone, insisting on it, in fact. But I’d rather get my answers in cold, hard virtual print. That way there can be no confusion over who said what.

Cheers!

Just like statistics, you can always find someone to say “yeah, that’s good” provided you find the right ones. They can be in any interest group as you will always have opposing sides. Self interests are always at the bottom of the approval. In some way either the authority gets benefits from status quo or they expect to sometime in the future. Once in a while you actually find someone who believes the tripe to begin with and will allow their name to be used.

When all else fails, not identifying who the approval source was works as well. This is more of the Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics. Take a public campaign for any issue, put it in print, allow it to get out and around, and you will always find support for your selfmade stance.

the inside cover of the comic lists the judicial sources used in reviewing the comic; it might be worth someone’s while to see if those guys had connections to the recording industry and its cronies.

cheers,

dt