On Jan 6, 2008, at 1:35 PM, der.hans wrote:
> I disagree. I read the docuement from Atlantic the same as he does. I
> think it's the document from Atlantic that's the falsehood.
I'm confused. I don't any reference to the Atlantic in Fisher's WaPo
article. Fisher provides no links but I think it is clear that he is
talking about this document:
<
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=atlantic_howell_071207RIAASupplementalBrief
>
> The RIAA has definitely taken a stance against fair use and is
> trying to
> limit fair use. I'd rather overreact when the RIAA tests the waters
> than
> just presume it's an accidental oversight.
This is just a difference in strategy. I think we need to be careful
not to over react lest we squander or credibility before they make
the big push.
> Did her statement get stricken from the record? Was it still in
> effect for
> the jury during deliberation?
Not only was it part of the record, she herself has never publicly
retracted it. We only get this story that she misheard the question
from a 3rd party. Now I'm not a lawyer but I believe that a statement
made under oath stands until it is retracted under oath.
As Patry pointed out, what she said was "When an individual makes a
copy *for himself*." which doesn't sound like she misheard the question.
--
Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!
---------------------------------------------------
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)