Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts

Submission + - RIAA's attack on NewYorkCountryLawyer fails (p2pnet.net)

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: "p2pnet.net reports that the RIAA has egg on its face. When the Electronic Frontier Foundation requested permission to file an amicus curiae brief on behalf of Boston University students challenging the RIAA's ex parte discovery order, the RIAA lawyers attacked the blog "Recording Industry vs. The People" for its criticism of the RIAA as seeking to "abuse the American judicial system, distort copyright law, and frighten ordinary working people and their children" and then falsely claimed that the blog's author is an EFF attorney, this despite the fact that they know that the blog's author (known on Slashdot as NewYorkCountryLawyer) is a partner in a New York law firm and is not an EFF attorney. Judge Gertner apparently wasn't impressed, and granted the EFF's motion, rejecting the RIAA's objections, since she felt amici curiae might "shed light" on the "copyright law" and "computer technology" issues before her."
Idle

Film School Masterpiece Screenshot-sm

samzenpus writes "Film school movies are often bleak, brooding and angry. This one isn't bleak."
The Courts

Submission + - How should I have responded to RIAA lawyer? 10

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: "The RIAA's lawyers are a bit jumpy these days since their standard "making available" boilerplate was rejected by the Court in Interscope v. Rodriguez. But I still never expected, when I initiated a dismissal motion in Elektra v. Schwartz, that they would be reaching out to me , of all people, for help. But so they did, asking me "in the interest of efficiency... what precisely Defendant contends is lacking from Plaintiffs' Complaint for Defendant to consider it sufficient. Perhaps Plaintiffs may be able to satisfy these alleged deficiencies and spare both parties additional and unnecessary motions practice." Unfortunately my response was not very helpful; I couldn't think of anything better than to say, more or less, that "Plaintiffs have no case whatsoever against Ms. Schwartz, and their case against her was frivolous in its inception. Accordingly, there are no facts they can allege that will satisfy the plausibility standard." On reflection, I'm feeling kind of guilty that I didn't give them a more creative, and helpful answer, and I thought to turn to my friends at Slashdot, who are (a) almost always helpful, and (b) always creative. What would you have said?"

Slashdot Top Deals

Been Transferred Lately?

Working...