Large Recording Companies v. The Defenseless Some Common Se

[TorrentMama]

Story : http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogsp ... large.html

The Judges' Journal, the quarterly publication of the Judicial Division of the American Bar Association, invited the author of this blog to write an article for its "Equal Access to Justice" edition.

I of course accepted the invitation, and submitted an article, entitled "Large Recording Companies vs. The Defenseless : Some Common Sense Solutions to the Challenges of the RIAA Litigations". In it I describe the RIAA litigation process and the challenge it represents to our adversarial system of justice, and make 15 hopefully constructive suggestions as to how the Courts can help to level the playing field in these cases.

The article has now been published, and is available in the current edition of The Judges' Journal.

The ABA has graciously granted permission to reprint the article, for the benefit of those who are not recipients of The Judges' Journal.

Without further ado, here it is: http://www.doomgold.com/misc/080729Larg ... seless.htm

[Xeno]

Not sure if anyone's bothered to read the pdf file in that article or not, but I really hope some of the judges do. Ray lays out some very good points, with a lot of refrences to back them up.

To compensate for this shotgun approach,9 the RIAA’s lawyers are fond of suggesting that the person who paid for an Internet access account is responsible for any copyright infringement
with which that Internet access has been associated. The only problem with this viewpoint is that the U.S. Supreme Court disagrees with it. In MGM v. Grokster,10 the Court adopted an “inducement rule,” holding that secondary
copyright infringement liability requires “clear expression or other affirmative
steps taken to foster infringement.”

Definitely one of my favorite points...

[piXelatedEmpire]

This article by Ray is getting a little bit of attention:

Lawyer Exposes RIAA’s Legal Bullying
RIAA Critic Publishes a Paper on the RIAA Litigation Process

[Golgo1]

hooah RAY

it was well written. Not full of too much legal mumbojumbo, so we can understand it, and not too full of tech talk, so judges and lawers can understand it.

It covers alot of the major problems with the cases. As mentioned, it can cover ALOT more, but then it would be 50 pages long

a great read

[RayBeckerman]

hooah RAY

it was well written. Not full of too much legal mumbojumbo, so we can understand it, and not too full of tech talk, so judges and lawers can understand it.

It covers alot of the major problems with the cases. As mentioned, it can cover ALOT more, but then it would be 50 pages long

a great read

Thanks, Golgo1. Actually, although I could have written a lot more, I was lucky to get that much in. It was about twice as long as their regular word limit, and it was about twice as long as the next longest article in the issue. The editors were very enthusiastic about it, because it fit in very well with the theme of that edition, which is "equal access to justice". The RIAA cases are a very extreme example of 'unequal access to justice', because in any case the RIAA can and will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, while the defendant can't.