On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 23:10 -0700, der.hans wrote:
> That's why I suggested we try to help Howell. I don't support illegally
> sharing copyrighted works. I also don't support large corporations
> with deep pockets suing people into oblivion. I especially don't
> support the big companies if they're using that case to try to cause me
> problems. Trying to curtail fair use is definitely something that causes
> me problems.
----
The issues that we are discussing and were brought to the fore by the
various media outlets such as the Washington Post article by Mark Fisher
are not the issues that are of specific use to Howell. It is at the very
best, an issue to potentially mitigate the damages but he has already
conceded the points of the plaintiff.
Curiously, plaintiff's claims for a reduced burden of proof came after
the simultaneous award for plaintiffs in Capitol vs Thomas and this
court request for briefings in preparation for oral arguments...
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=atlantic_howell_071003OrderDirectingFurtherBriefingof4Questions
and comically, the parties were given a week to submit briefs on the
matter and Howell, pro se, probably could have had 4 months and it
wouldn't have made a difference.
In their supplemental brief for summary judgment, plaintiff makes
specific reference to the reduced burden of proof established by Capitol
vs Thomas and this specifically relates to fair use.
The NPR 'Talk of the Nation' show (which I've been unable to play on
Linux...I might have to switch over to Windows to hear it), clearly has
Sherman of the RIAA incapable of issuing a blanket statement that it is
legal to rip a copy of a CD that you own to your hard drive. RIAA's
current position is that they and they alone are the arbiter of what
constitutes fair use and while the courts have yet to fully weigh in,
it's evident that when you've been selected as their next train wreck,
like Howell, the distinction of what constitutes fair use is not going
to stop the train that is coming your way at full bore. According to Roy
Beckerman, lawyer defending several RIAA targets, this is no accident
but rather the deliberate attempt by plaintiff (RIAA) to establish
precedent and thereby codify their view of fair use.
Craig
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)