Nesson to RIAA: it’s an ‘issue of immense triviality’
p2pnet news view | RIAA News:- “Just thought some of you might like seeing email strings between Prof Nesson and Timothy Reynolds in SONY BMG Music v Tenenbaum,” posts Ray Beckerman on Recording Industry vs The People, “so here’s one.” »»»
From: Charles Nesson
Date: Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 11:41 AM
To: Timothy M Reynolds
Cc: Eve Burton [right], Joel Tenenbaum, Arthur & Judie Tenenbaum, CyberOne RIAA
hello tim
no, this is not an important issue. this is an issue of immense triviality such as to make a mockery of you in denver and me in cambridge spending our friday morning sending email back and forth to each other about it. there are truly important issues at stake in this litigation but this is not one of them.
From: Timothy M Reynolds
Date: Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 11:34 AM
To: nesson@gmail.com
Cc: Eve BurtonHello Charlie:
Eve forwarded your email to me. I don`t wish to belabor this, but we want to be sure of the status of things so that we can make a decision on whether to move to compel. The testimony thus far has been clear that Joel created and maintained in his music collection a number of homemade music CDs, and that he left some of his collection at 20 Upton Avenue. I am concerned about the narrow scope of Ms. Tenenbaum`s response below (ie., no CDs in our house). Please advise as to whether Mr. or Mrs. Tenenbaum have any homemade music CDs in their possession, custody or control (regardless of whether such CDs are in the house). If they do not, can you please advise as to what happened to the CDs Joel left? This is an important issue. Thanks very much.
Tim
From: Charles Nesson
To: Eve Burton
Sent: Fri Nov 21 05:37:09 2008
Subject: Fwd: Fwd: [cyberone-riaa] Motion to Quash – Arthur & Judie Subpoena
âââ- Forwarded message âââ-
From: Tenenbaum
Date: Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:25 PMSubject: Re: Fwd: [cyberone-riaa] Motion to Quash – Arthur & Judie Subpoena
To: nesson at law.harvard.eduThere are no CDRS in our house that Joel created.
Charles Nesson wrote:
eve burton writes: the question is whether there are any CDRs that Joel created that are in their possession, custody or control? Are there any CDRs in their house that Joel created?
From: Eve Burton
Date: Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 6:44 PM
Subject: RE: [cyberone-riaa] Motion to Quash – Arthur & Judie Subpoena
To: nesson@law.harvard.edu
Cc: Timothy M Reynolds , Laurie Rust , Anne Allen
Charlie:
Just to be clear, your email below states that Joel did not burn any CDRs for, or give any CDRs to, Arthur or Judie, but the question is whether there are any CDRs that Joel created that are in their possession, custody or control? Are there any CDRs in their house that Joel created? Can you please clarify. We would like to avoid unnecessary motions practice.
Thanks.
Eve
From: Charles Nesson
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 3:36 PM
To: Eve Burton
Cc: Joel Tenenbaum ; Arthur & Judie Tenenbaum; CyberOne RIAA
Subject: Re: [cyberone-riaa] Motion to Quash – Arthur & Judie Subpoenaeve:
we claim that your use of process against joel is abusive and improperly in service of the prosecution through civil process of an essentially criminal claim. as such it should stop, at least until the judge had had a chance to rule on our contention.in any event both judie and arthur stated in their depositions that joel did not burn cds for them or give cds to them. your subpoena calls for them to produce all burned cds from joel they possess. they represent to me they have nothing to produce.
-charlie
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Eve Burton wrote:
Charlie:
Please explain what possible grounds you have to move to quash this subpoena (in this regard, you may want to look at our Motion to Compel the Tova subpoena b/c our arguments on relevance and burden are largely the same and address your likely arguments here as well). Our subpoena is very limited and the CDRs are clearly relevant based on the deposition testimony. You have opposed virtually every bit of discovery we have sought in this case. The arguments you are putting forward are borderline frivolous. At some point we may seek our costs for this vexatious strategy of opposing all discovery.
Eve[...]
âOriginal Messageâ
From: Charles Nesson
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 8:47 AM
To: Eve Burton
Cc: CyberOne RIAA ; Joel Tenenbaum ; Arthur & Judie TenenbaumSubject: Re: [cyberone-riaa] Motion to Quash – Arthur & Judie Subpoena
we will be filing a motion to quash Arthur and Judie Tenenbaum`s subpoena
when appropriate (in my judgment) to an open project and not sensitive (in my judgment) in terms of privacy, i may post email to my blog. all privacy requests respected.
Meanwhile, “My guess is that the RIAA will drop its case against Tenenbaum and attempt to get the countersuit mooted rather than try to defend on the merits,” says Alan Wexelblat on Corante.
Stay tuned.
Did you enjoy this story, or find it interesting/useful? Help keep the posts coming by donating. No amount is too small. Cheers! And thanks.
Recording Industry vs The People - Email string between Prof. Nesson and Timothy Reynolds, November 22, 2008
Corante – RIAA v. Joel Tenenbaum: The Fleet is in Motion, November 24. 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It`s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
November 24th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
When it comes to acknowledging that someone is innocent of the accusations leveled, the enforcement arms don’t seem to think that it is important. When it comes to threatening their legal model to pursue, now that is a whole ‘nother animal.
To me it is again demonstrated that this suing model is malicious in nature, vindictive with purpose, and entirely uncalled for.
Yet the employees and those that represent the RIAA and major labels from time to time come to the public with “Hey we ain’t the bad guys. We’re just normal Joes like you”. When the rare occasion comes that the inside info comes out about their day to day operations, we see just who is the bad guys.
It has painted the entire industry with the same brush in the public’s eye. That there are few businesses that could possibly reach a lower level of slime than the entertainment ones we hear of constantly moaning and groaning because somehow, everyone forgot to grant them a license to print money rather than have to put brow sweat into earning it by satisfying the customer and market.