Sccts guy contradicts RIAA document

[Craig White]

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.
----
Ray Beckerman has a fairly extensive breakdown for Howell on the web
site that was linked by Chris... If Howell or any friend of Howell is
monitoring...

http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2007/12/establishment-press-takes-riaa-on.html

very near the bottom of the page

Ray Beckerman said... 
        
        1. The judge asked the parties to brief this question "Does the
        record in this case show that defendant Howell possessed an
        “unlawful copy” of the plaintiff’s copyrighted material...?"
        
        2. The answer he got to that particular question was not
        responsive. It was this: "It is undisputed that Defendant
        possessed unauthorized copies of Plaintiffs’ copyrighted sound
        recordings on his computer. Exhibit B to Plaintiffs’ Complaint
        is a series of screen shots showing the sound recording and
        other files found in the KaZaA shared folder on Defendant’s
        computer on January 30, 2006. (SOF, Doc. No. 31, at ¶¶ 4-6);
        Exhibit 12 to SOF at ¶¶ 13, 17-18.) Virtually all of the sound
        recordings on Exhibit B are in the “.mp3” format. (Exhibit 10 to
        SOF, showing virtually all audio files with the “.mp3”
        extension.) Defendant admitted that he converted these sound
        recordings from their original format to the .mp3 format for his
        and his wife’s use. (Howell Dep. 107:24 to 110:2; 114:1 to
        116:16). The .mp3 format is a “compressed format [that] allows
        for rapid transmission of digital audio files from one computer
        to another by electronic mail or any other file transfer
        protocol.” Napster, 239 F.3d at 1011. Once Defendant converted
        Plaintiffs’ recording into the compressed .mp3 format and they
        are in his shared folder, they are no longer the authorized
        copies distributed by Plaintiffs."
        
        3. The other answers the plaintiffs' gave to other questions are
        irrelevant. All I was ever reporting on was the answer to the
        question as to whether the copies on the computer were
        themselves "unlawful".
        
        4. From those who think that the RIAA wasn't talking about
        copying cd's into mp3's, I have yet to hear a satisfactory
        explanation for the RIAA's inclusion of the following language
        in its answer: "It is undisputed that Defendant possessed
        unauthorized copies of Plaintiffs’ copyrighted sound recordings
        on his computer. Exhibit B to Plaintiffs’ Complaint is a series
        of screen shots showing the sound recording and other files
        found in the KaZaA shared folder on Defendant’s computer on
        January 30, 2006. (SOF, Doc. No. 31, at ¶¶ 4-6); Exhibit 12 to
        SOF at ¶¶ 13, 17-18.) Virtually all of the sound recordings on
        Exhibit B are in the “.mp3” format. (Exhibit 10 to SOF, showing
        virtually all audio files with the “.mp3” extension.) Defendant
        admitted that he converted these sound recordings from their
        original format to the .mp3 format for his and his wife’s use.
        (Howell Dep. 107:24 to 110:2; 114:1 to 116:16). The .mp3 format
        is a “compressed format [that] allows for rapid transmission of
        digital audio files from one computer to another by electronic
        mail or any other file transfer protocol.” Napster, 239 F.3d at
        1011. Once Defendant converted Plaintiffs’ recording into the
        compressed .mp3 format....."
        
        10:45 PM