Joel Tenenbaum vs RIAA
p2pnet view P2P | RIAA News | Entertainment | Music:- After listening to oral arguments in the SONY v Tenenbaum case posted on Ray Beckerman’s blog…
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
…I had a few thoughts. The April 4th, 2001 1st U.S. Circuit Court in Boston Massachussettes 9:30am docket agenda was only for an oral argument regarding the proprietary of such and enormous award reduction by Judge Gertner’s reduction of the $675,000 original jury verdict to $67,500.
The basic overview was that Jeffrey Clair for the U.S. Council, and Paul Clement, a prior solicitor general (can you say revolving door?) voiced their arguments based on Williams that allows them to circumvent violating the 7th Amendment concerning Statutory Damages Provision to excess. Mr Clair argued that Remittitur was not even an option that should be heard by the court, and that the excessive damages do not create a Constitutional issue.
Mr Clement, however, was much more colorful in framing the debate around the devastation the recording industry has suffered, and apparently it is all Joel’s fault. He completely side stepped the issue of performance rights violations and focused on the distribution angle. “It’s taking copyrighted work and putting it in the public domain”, he stated. He wrongly advised the court that ALL file sharing technology forces you to share a folder, thus making available.
One of the judges called him on this by asking, “is making available equate to distribution?” He quickly moved the argument over to Joel’s behavior being reprehensible and “we [RIAA] are devastated by file sharing distribution”, making it sound like the entire music industry’s woes are due to Joel downloading 30 songs. “We have technology that could prove distribution, your honor, but the defendant admitted his guilt, so that is proof enough”, “we can prove it, we just don’t know how many times the work in question was distributed”, he continued.
If you can prove it, then why can you not know how many times, and for which work was infringed upon? I would say you can’t. The EFF got to speak, a Ms Jule Aarons, who seemed scared shitless, again affirmed the defenses taken by Joel and others. Because Joel endured a civil trial, there was no jury, only during the damages portion of his trial was there a jury, and the EFF was not allowed to participate in education of the jury. Joel’s motion for fair use was denied, he was not allowed any witness, there was no proof provided by the plantiffs, and the EFF brief to the jury was denied because the plaintiffs argued that would be considered nullification.
Nesson spoke, what a beatnik, anyway, he started his 3 minutes quoting some obscure, irrelevant book, and then goes on to accuse the RIAA of “[they] articulate the statute as expansively as possible in their own interests”. That in 1909 Statutory Damages were introduced for commercial infringement ONLY, there was even a menu of specific infringements and specific damages for each. Even after the amendment in 1976, they changed the ranges of damages, removed the menu, and still maintained the target was commercial infringement, and not to bankrupt consumers. He compared willful file sharing to willful jaywalking.
It was good to actually sit thru the hearing and listen to these bright minds spew mindless drivel arguing that screwing over our customers with astronomical damage awards is just fine, nothing new here. The level of audacity heard in the plaintiffs voices is unmistakable. I believe the Constitution is clear on this, and that the Statutory Damages Provision was implicitly designed for commercial infringement.
File sharing is copyright infringement, nothing more, a civil offense. It is not theft, it is not even a lost sale. The rhetorical propaganda, outright lies of damages, and the abundance of self worth has done nothing to help an industry in the spirals of death. As more and more real research is done on the affects of file sharing, less and less of it is being heard, considered, or even reviewed during any copyright legislation.
So the question remains, will Joel be responsible for $675,000 in damages the greedy RIAA are demanding, or will he owe $67,500 that Judge Gertner imposed, or will the 1st Circuit Court reduce it to $30, which is what Joel believes he owes.
Stay Tuned…
surfer – p2pnet
Share the wealth
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi
World War III will be a global information war with no division between civilian & military participation ~ Marshall McLuhan
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. Subscribe to p2pnet.net | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/feed
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
April 11th, 2011 at 10:46 pm
$675,000? $67,500? $30? For me This would not matter because I will not give a peny to these corporates parasites and their lawyers.
Also it would be ill advised to insist on this for them because they might get more than they bargain for in retaliation.
April 12th, 2011 at 8:08 am
I agree with Joel – $30 sounds about right, possibly up to $100 would be fair! The question is whether legal costs should be awarded to the plaintiffs and how much these amount to? They could easily be in the 100′s of thousands of $$$
April 12th, 2011 at 3:12 pm
No, no amount paid to these scumbags would be fair.
You can’t prove that Joel’s file sharing did any damage at all. On top of that, various studies have shown that file sharing *does not* reduce sales and often increases them, as interest is increased.
Big media should just go and fucking die!
April 12th, 2011 at 4:08 pm
“the question is whether legal costs should be awarded to the plaintiffs and how much these amount to? They could easily be in the 100’s of thousands of $$$ ”
Tough shit.
If they are stupid enough to spend ” 100’s of thousands of $$$ ” to get 100 that’s their problem, especially since they have NO EVIDENCE. It’s not a question at all, really.
April 12th, 2011 at 5:14 pm
RIAA Spent $17.6 Million In Lawsuits… To Get $391,000 In Settlements?
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100713/17400810200.shtml
April 13th, 2011 at 11:30 am
Joel Tenenbaum is totally innocent and should not have to pay anything.
The real guilty are the millions who invented, programmed for, financed, built equipment for, approved or profited from THE INTERNET. All of these should have known the inevitable, the the INTERNET was going to wind up being used for file sharing. Think of it, the malice was intentional. Surely they were all out to destroy the music and movie business because of all the crap they were producing and for promoting drug use, the worse thing since WWII.
These steps should be taken:
1. Joel Tenenbaum should be released from the dungeon he is probably at.
2. The UN (too many nationalities are involved for one country to take over) should name a get at the truth commission. Then everyone that is guilty for the progress of the INTERNET should be fined a percent of their wealth.
3. The fine money can be used to eradicate poverty in all countries. Whatever money is not spent, use it to buy all the pharmaceutical companies. That way all their $100,000 per year medicines can be sold at cost, $100.
April 13th, 2011 at 8:23 pm
Problem Solver is right.
looking at documents on Ray Beckerman’s blog court was convened in Admiralty court as lawyers and fraudulent federal judges were involved,
with no case number – “CV. NO.” is not a “Case Number”,
no one asked for judge’s oath before beginning of trial – which would have certified judge as common law / law of the land judge,
no one asked which jurisdiction this is under – admiralty / federal court has no jurisdiction on land,
jury trial was not asked for – a deception and fraud by admiralty since jury would have seen through the fraud, kicked SONY in the nuts and out the door and maybe even arrested fraudulent judge,
Marc Stevens of – Marc Stevens dot Net – or even i would have thrown this back in SONY faces and charged them for fraud, extortion, lost time, etc. under Common Law
Wake up already
April 14th, 2011 at 3:52 pm
Forgive me for asking this Gabbi but your post and others seen here reference admiralty law and not the law statutes provided by the current judicial administration is there some historical or factual reason you mention a distinction and believe the current law making architecture is null or void ?
April 14th, 2011 at 7:54 pm
Qaurtz:
primarily it has to do with Sovereignty. it has to do with words, specific words used in certain ways. if those words are codified, have different meaning than commonly known, they are of another language know as Legalese or some other. pull out your Law dictionaries and check every one, starting with ones in title
you need to look at the situation from the start of explorers to Americas, their deals / Treaties with European Monarchies and Sovereign holders of this land called Turtle Island – Americas.
explorers could only make deals and couldn’t steal the land Lawfully, even though they tried and still are
founding fathers had to ask permission from French, Spanish, English, Portuguese and other Monarchies to start so called America, Canada and others. in order to find out truth one must check American side and Monarchy side documents.
they state that America is only 5 to 10 miles of “waterway” around the Land of Turtle Island and small parcels of land of actual land bound by individual treaties. These later turned into Estates or now know as States.
look up the word “State” in Law dictionaries of the times and perspective languages. You will be surprised.
also look up the word Statute in same dictionaries. you will find it has the force of Law, only when accepted by one, it is not Law. that’s why it’s called a Statute. same for Acts, Bills, Legislation, Mandates, etc.
therefore they are all Admiralty Law and not of the Land.
Laws can only be made by God and only as Natural and or Universal Laws. A God was a ruler over a section or area of planet called Earth. for this and related you need to study history as far back as it goes.
BTW – Washington DC / Feds only have jurisdiction 10 miles around it. anything outside of that is Sovereign and or State/Estate land. each State or Estate is a small chuck of land created by a Treaty with Sovereigns and true owners of the land.
“current law making architecture is null or void” is NOT null and void but pertains to Admiralty Law only. Civil Law is part of that Admiralty Law and tries to trump Law of The Land by deception. Declaration of Independence to creation of Constitution is to create a separate and distinct “Corporation” not ruled by European Monarchy on the land they call New whatever.
your words say it all – “administration” – to administer – be an administrator or overseer of an “account” or “cargo” – not a Sovereign Man or Woman
- “judicial” – judge/captain – an individual of Admiralty Law, as on a ship – an individual who issues orders > an order must have a “bill” given to issuer for payment of cargo or service provided. it’s how you can walk into their court and charge them for your time, damages and inconvenience – same as a lawyer does but with much more power
it all comes down to is this -> how can you be bound by a contract which you have not agreed to and not signed?
*when you appear in front of their court and you present your Sovereign or Common Law Rights they know it and they are deathly afraid you have your Community behind you with pitchforks or arms to kick them out or take them out. they try every trick and deception at their disposal to “re side” to their Law / their Jurisdiction, not yours and your Community
BTW – you can leave their jurisdiction at any time by signing out of it or cancel any contracts you have made with them
only true Laws of Men and Women is Common Law as set forth by Common Agreements of Sovereign Men and Women on The Land and Gods Laws passed through generations since creation of Men and Women
translation – each case must be decided in front of whole Tribe and by a majority of your peers, each Man and Woman gets a vote, as it should be, as they have the power to kick offender out of their Community and or only ones to seize his or her property as compensation.
*note – the above is a general outline. for further study see related subjects
April 15th, 2011 at 10:33 am
” is there some historical or factual reason you mention a distinction and believe the current law making architecture is null or void ? ”
No quartz, their isn’t.
This same tactic has been tried in the US as a way to dodge everything from jail time to taxes.
It always ends the same way … Jail.
Do a bit of googling around, you’ll find it.
April 15th, 2011 at 12:54 pm
Dreddsnik: “It always ends the same way … Jail.”
your comment is bullsh*t and you know it.
1 – show me and everyone here the Law that says you have to pay taxes
2 – what’s the difference between lawful and legal?
3 – why aren’t those who use Common Law against Admiralty and Civil Law in jail?
4 – why isn’t Marc Stevens in jail?
Opinions are not acceptable as answers.
April 15th, 2011 at 5:08 pm
” your comment is bullsh*t and you know it. ”
Not really.
The gibberish you spout is, actually.
Do you pay your taxes ?
If not, i am sure, since it’s perfectly legal, that you will share your identity as proof that your ‘system’ works.
That’s proof.
The people ( easily found ) that got laughed out of court and hauled into jail , well that’s pretty conclusive.
Marc Stevens ?
I don’t know why he is not in jail, Ask his lawyer.
Why isn’t OJ in Jail ?
Since he is not, does that make murder OK too ?
Since you are, after all, the one that proposes this same godawful derp nearly every time you post, I think the
burden of ‘proof’ is on you.
April 15th, 2011 at 10:51 pm
Dreddsnik:
you didn’t answer points 1, 2, 3
this means you are redirecting your argument to some off the wall assumptions without showing “proof”. you do same on most forums you are on: http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&source=hp&biw=1002&bih=836&q=dreddsnik&aq=f&aqi=g-sv1&aql=&oq=&fp=5c57203f23eb54d1
part of proof supporting my statements is already on this forum by others: http://www.p2pnet.net/story/48905/comment-page-1#comment-1054030
BTW: my identity is well known by the system, anytime you want to do freedom of information request you are welcome to do so. your identity is easily figured out as you left all those internet tracks pointing directly to your location
not very smart?
April 17th, 2011 at 2:36 am
Dreddsnik:
your wife is a notary and you can’t answer 4 simple questions or ask them of her?