Comments on: RIAA v Joel: over already?

By: SteelWolf

SteelWolf — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 10:30:58 +0000

If you look at Ray Beckerman’s commentary, it seemed like there were ways in both the Thomas and this trial where an appropriately prepared defense team could have made a clear argument for what the plaintiffs must prove. Defense teams have yet to lay out those claims in a way that it portrays these cases for the farces they are, instead getting hung up on “long shots” and hoping to win the hearts of the jury. I want to see Ray run one of these cases so we can see what happens when somebody actually asks the questions that need to be asked of the plaintiffs in these trials.

By: Irate Pirate

Irate Pirate — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 10:43:56 +0000

The judge has effectively tied the hands of the defense behind their backs before the trial has even begun. I’m betting Joel only admitted to file sharing because it was part of their planned “fair use” defense. Now that the judge has thrown their defense out the window, I’m betting the defendant and his team are sincerely wishing he had not admitted to anything. I do not believe they will wow us with some super secret tactic they’ve been hiding all along either.

Like Dreddsnik, I have to say that I’m truly amazed by the proceedings involving Joel’s deposition as well. The judge created a situation in which Joel was expected to prove his innocence while the plaintiffs were required to do nothing. This is 100% wrong. The onus is upon the plaintiffs to prove every single one of their claims, not the other way around. It is astonishing how little the concept of innocent until proven guilty means in the 21st century. Nobody seems to understand the whole concept behind a jury of your peers anymore either. If you were a doctor on trial for malpractice, should you be judged by a bunch of random yokels or a panel of doctors that both the defendant and plaintiff agree upon?

Mark my words, this case is utterly doomed to failure. It was doomed before it even began. The only thing that will be accomplished from this point forward is showing the world once and for all just how badly screwed up the American justice system is. I also wouldn’t be at all surprised if some connection between the judge and the entertainment industry came to light somewhere down the road, which I believe it very well may. Based on the evidence so far, I’m finding it very hard to believe this judge is at all impartial to these proceedings.

By: Thomas Koltai

Thomas Koltai — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 09:03:40 +0000

Jack from Nashville.

They don’t have to collect the money from the defendent. If he hasnt got it – then it becomes a bad debt – and is claimed as a tax deduction – in other words, they collect it from you – the Amrican taxpayer.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:13:45 +0000

Thailand formed death squads from parents of drug addicts to eradicate traffickers.

So, it is not only American.

By: Jack From Nashville

Jack From Nashville — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 17:52:35 +0000

Okay they can fine anyone a gazillion dollars, but how are they gonna collect? Send it to a collection agency. Lol! Don’t pay these ungodly fines.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:56:40 +0000

lol

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:53:40 +0000

“I put my hope into my guns.”

How “American” of you!
:\

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:32:08 +0000

I put my hope into my guns.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:22:08 +0000

it will never be over until all these entertainment parasites are dead. The trial is rigged.
The judge has been bought and the jury is slanted probably even corrupted.

If it was not so they would never have started this.

They has been others attempt to do the same thing to others people but the corruption attempt
of the judge failed in most case and even came close to disaster a couple of time.

Not all the judges are piece of crap you know. But Nancy Gertner is one of those. Never accept her in any trial.
Always oppose her nomination and ask for another judge.

The corporations of parasites never proceed with the trial unless it is properly rigged.

The only good new is that all of this is costing the parasites a fortune.

Joel must wait until they filled all their financial claims and BK chapter 7.

The parasites got zip! They even will have to pay their legal bills and of course all the corrupting bribes.

Meanwhile,

BOYCOTT THE 7 CORPORATIONS OF EVIL MEMBER OF THE RIAA/MPAA
BOYCOTT ANY OTHER COMPANY OR PERSON SUPPORTING THESE GANGSTERS!
NO CD NO DVD NO MOVIES NO DOWNLOAD!

These are our countries and it is our duty to defend them! Nancy Gertner is a criminal for accepting bribes and she should be investigated debarred and prosecuted. If she is not we will have to do it ourselves.

The law is a consensus. If there is no consensus ther is no law. When there is no law it is the law of the strongest.
They are the richest but we are the strongest and at the end they are not going to make it.

By: Dreddsnik

Dreddsnik — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:42:40 +0000

” ruling the Tenenbaum team had, âput no facts into evidence on which the Court could rely; his opposition briefs are not accompanied by any affidavit, expert report, deposition testimony, or other evidence of the kind described by Rule 56(e)â.

So he was required to Prove His Innocence while the plaintiffs had to prove nothing.
Plaintiffs were not required to show any proof of ANYTHING. I understand the burden
of proof is less but it STILL FALLS ON THE PLAINTIFF. This stinks of green.

Where I live, Judges are elected. I hope that’s true where Judge Gertner serves corporate america.
If you live in that district, find out of your judges are elected. If so, put her out of work.

By: David

David — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:40:54 +0000

I’m kind of hoping that if Joel loses the case, the Jury awards such exorbitant damages that Judge Gertner has to determine that it violates the Constitution’s guarantee of due process. If she’s in any way fair (and there’s no guarantee of that) then perhaps her decision to instruct the jury early on the damages could play into that, and ‘nudge’ the jury into awarding massive damages.

It certainly seems that she was disposed to view the fair-use defense kindly, if only Charlie had offered one that was reasonable under the existing law.

It will be interesting to see if he has a rabbit to pull out of his hat. I. for one, suspect he doesn’t, but I’d be delighted to be surprised by him.

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 13:55:48 +0000

So we rallied for what? nothing!

By: A_F

A_F — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 13:52:48 +0000

well Robert, what “hidden plan” could Team Tenenbaum even have!
Effectively has he admitted that he had downloaded certain songs, and he has admitted that he has seen in the programs graphical user interface that others got music from him too.
So making copies without the copyrightsholders permission and distribution of them is both admitted by him and those 2 things are against US copyright law.
And at least since the gonzales case (a case where a female defendant admitted to have only downloaded songs and kept them but where not also unauthorised distribution was proven/admitted) where some higher court then the one of judge Gertner here already said that downloading and keeping instead of paying for a license is NOT fair use, the fair use defense is IMO a no-go.

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:54:03 +0000

This reminds me of Jammie Thomas and Pirate Bay trials. You hear all this hoopla about how the team is going to put the industry back in its place, and what do you get? A judge that sides with the corporate money (has anyone investigated them? if they’ve nothing to hide, they should not care, isn’t that what we citizens are told when some judge thinks it is fine to invade our privacy?) and you see the case of the defendants just fall apart, like they were bluffing.

I had hoped the Pirate Bay trial team had a hidden plan. I had hoped the Jammie Thomas team had a hidden plan.

Now, I somehow doubt the Tenenbaum will amaze us with a hidden surprise to work the magic.

My conclusion is the “justice” system isn’t just anymore, the $$ flowing from the supposedly financially ruined movie/music industry seems to be infiltrating the legal system. Have we reached the point of no return? Have the corporations won?

There’s lots of comments “they are dying” and “they are dead” and “there’s nothing left, it’s over.” But I think that applies to the rights of the citizens and fair-use, public domain.

Short of a revolution, I don’t think any trials will magically change things, especially when we put all of our hopes into what appears to be a glorious luxury liner, unsinkable. And just as the Titanic, this liner will sink, with icebergs strategically placed by the **AA groups and for some reason, those manning the ship with all their technology and ability they tote, still can’t out maneuver the icebergs.