You are viewing a read-only archive of the Blogs.Harvard network. Learn more.

today’s mail

Cory Doctorow: Why I Copyfight
tx wayne
tx cory

particularly liked this one

From: Carrie
Date: Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 7:50 PM
Subject: You should be ashamed of yourself

I hope you feel real good about yourself… defending thieves who are stealing other people’s intellectual property. I work for a major music company and it’s people like you and your client that are putting people like me out of a job. Do you realize how many people it takes to make and distribute an album, or record a song for that matter? I’m sure you haven’t a clue, and more so you won’t bother to educate yourself on it. Instead you choose to defend some lowlife that is not only steeling from the artist, the record company & the publisher, but is also putting thousands of employees jobs in jeopardy. Regardless of whether or not the record company’s fines are extreme, there is no changing the fact that your client is a THIEF. Now we’re suppose to feel sorry for your client because the penalty is too harsh? What… he couldn’t afford the $.99 it cost to download a song? This guy not only stole, but enabled other people to steal. I just don’t understand how you could defend someone like that based on some technicality.


where do you work. maybe you’d invite me to come visit, meet the people

From: Shubham Mukherjee

Just saw this news on TechDirt.

“The RIAA is now celebrating the fact that Tennessee has passed
legislation that requires universities to install filters if they’ve
received at least 50 DMCA requests.”

That the law directly ties the infringement notices to the filters may
help us make our case.


From: breyer @courtroomconnect

Dear Charlie,

I was writing to see if you might consider requesting that Judge Gertner
allow any interested Media Company (including us in particular) to video
OR audio tape the ‘Capital Records Vs Alaujan’ trial.

We have been recording and narrow-casting quite a few federal
proceedings in the Eastern District of New York and the Southern
District of New York. The local rules in the Massachusetts District
Court are similar to both EDNY and SDNY and unquestionably allow the
Judge (in my view) to permit video and audio coverage if the Judge is so

I attach a recent letter we submitted in New York that should give you
an overview of the legal basis for such a request. Judge Gertner is
familiar with these issues since we submitted a full brief to her a
couple of months ago when we applied to cover the Country Wide
Litigation before her. She at the time said there were a number of
issues to be considered, such as consulting other members of the Court.
She delayed making a ruling and then the Country Wide litigation was
moved to another jurisdiction. Hopefully she will have spoken with her
colleagues by now and would be ready to proceed with a decision if she
were to get another request.

We do not have time as a third party to put in the request ourselves.
Our attorney at Boies Schiller advised us we would need at least 6 to 8
weeks to submit a request in the Massachusetts District Court. In
addition, we believe our chance of approval is dramatically higher if
one of the parties submitted the request.

We would be pleased to provide legal counsel and support (such as an
appearance, etc.) if that is helpful.

I hope all is well.


we could do this as a motion and an internet petition

0 Responses to “today’s mail”

Comments are currently closed.