OT: Berkman Center for Internet & Society (was: Re: [OT?] [...]Thomas / RIAA Case (was: Re: lawyer Ira Schwartz [...] (was: Re: [...])))

[Mike Schwartz]

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Mike Schwartz <schwartz at acm.org> wrote:
>
> (see below for 19-June-2008 comment)
>
> On Sun, Jan 6, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Mike Schwartz <schwartz at acm.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 1/6/08, Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com> wrote:
> > > 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 at lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> > > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >
> > "So far", this has been a very interesting thread.
> > I haven't followed (read) "all" of the links to outside interesting web pages,
> > but I did check out
> >    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=401886&threshold=0&commentsort=5&mode=flat&cid=21859278
> > a little bit, and it has a link to
> >   http://web.archive.org/web/20070516072606/http://www.riaa.com/issues/ask/default.asp
> > which I found very interesting.
> >   HOWEVER, the main reason I am writing now, is that I noticed
> > that der.hans picked up on something about the lawyer Ira Schwartz.
> > (**NOTE**: no relation to me, as far as I know).
> >   It's just that, a lawyer named Ira M. Schwartz (probably the same guy)
> > came and spoke to the Phoenix Chapter ACM (which I was the treasurer
> > of "at the time) on Tues., Nov. 19, 1996.   (The meeting was also jointly
> > sponsored by the Phoenix Chapter of the IEEE Computer Society, and
> > I think also a SPIN group too). Ira Schwartz had been invited to speak by
> > the chairperson of the chapter, Tony Rizzo.  The topic of his talk was
> >    "Software and the law"
> > and the meeting was held at DeVry [2149 W Dunlap] and I can tell
> > you (I was there) that the presentation was very interesting.  I would even
> > say, fascinating.  Also, the speaker seemed to be knowledgeable and
> > sorta "able to see both sides" on a very wide range of issues.  Many of the
> > issues he mentioned seemed to me, to be of the kind that strikes one as,
> > "hey, that is really interesting, I haven't really thought about / realized some
> > of that before, (but I probably should have!)".
> >     A few days ago (probably 01Jan2008) I e-mailed Tony, to ask him whether
> > this lawyer (mentioned in this case) was the same guy.  I still have some
> > copies (paper) of the Newsletter that was mailed out announcing the meeting,
> > [hence the amount of specific details included above, way more than
> >   my "off hand" recollection would have probably been limited to]
> > and it says that, at the time, Ira M. Schwartz was
> >     << "the managing attorney for Schwartz & Associates,
> >            which emphasizes intellectual property law.
> >            [...]  Schwartz is [1996] a frequent lecturer on copyright
> >            and computer law topics, [...]" >>.
> > I may also have at least one electronic copy of that newsletter (probably in
> > an MS-word format "older than Word 97!") lying around somewhere...
> > -- I'd have to check, and so far I am too lazy --
> > so that will have to remain a definite "maybe".
> >     Per his prompt e-mail reply, Tony Rizzo apparently hasn't kept in touch
> > with that lawyer / speaker (and - hey - it has been over 11 years), so he was
> > not sure whether this (the lawyer mentioned in this thread) is the same guy.
> > But I think he was local (living somewhere in the valley) at least, at
> > that time
> > [1996] so I think it is probably the same lawyer.
> >    Just thought this was interesting...
> > (even though - as far as I know - this lawyer Ira Schwartz is no
> > relation to me).
> > --
> > Mike Schwartz [...]
>
> 19-June-2008 comment:
>
> I know this is an old thread, and I haven't actually read (all of)
> this "Wired" article:
>    http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/professors-sidi.html
>    ("Professors Siding With Jammie Thomas in RIAA Case")
> e.g., here is an excerpt from the "Wired" article:
> << "The "making available" issue, combined with whether the RIAA's
> downloads can be used to prove distribution, are important questions
> of law whose ultimate answers promise to change the course of the
> RIAA's litigation machine, with more than 20,000 copyright
> infringement lawsuits filed so far." >>
>     but I thought that maybe those who had been following this stuff
> with interest, might want to read this.
> So, click or delete -- it's your choice...
> regards,
> --
> Mike Schwartz
> Glendale AZ
> schwartz at acm.org

maybe this is even more OT (Off Topic)...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkman_Center_for_Internet_%26_Society
--
Mike Schwartz
Glendale AZ
schwartz at acm.org