Quantcast
BROWSE ARTICLES BY CATEGORY
General | Posted by Max at Nov. 19, 2008 - 3:38 pm


In the past, it's been noted that the RIAA has curiously avoided suing any Harvard students, with one of the theories being that Harvard had made it quite clear to the RIAA that it would fight back hard. And, with Harvard law school at its disposal, and various professors there indicating that they had serious legal problems with the RIAA's strategy, the RIAA simply decided to ignore any file sharing going on at that prestigious university.

However, for RIAA critic and well known law professor, Charles Nesson, waiting around for the RIAA to sue someone at Harvard was getting boring, so he went out and found a case to participate in. Along with two third year law students, Nesson has hit back hard on the RIAA's efforts in a court filing, where it's noted that the very basis for many of the RIAA's lawsuits is very likely unconstitutional.


I've read through that at least three times now, not because it's complicated, but because it's so damned entertaining. And unlike the characterization of RIAA activities to RICO, this is interesting because it's so much more plausible. Plausible, Hell, it's right. I don't think anyone really believes that the RIAA is out for anything beyond self-interest, and they've absolutely picked a strategy of targeting the vulnerable (broke).

I think this is about to be the legal equivalent to He-Man wrestling midgets. Fun to watch, tickets always sell, and part of a long-standing foundation of our republic.

Maybe just my republic.

i always wondered why he-man wore pink
[Read Full Story at Techdirt]
Related News

1 User Comment
1 - Posted by syber on November 20, 2008 - 2:01 pm

The one thing about these suits is that they ignore they have attacked the wrong person. When the wrong person is attacked, the the actual suit filed in the court becomes a fraudulent lawsuit especially when the RIAA or Directv knows the suit is a false court complainant. This is a crime to knowingly file a suit you know to be false. The target of the suit then becomes a crime victim. But when the crime victim asks for victim assistance from the AG's office, they are ignored. It then becomes important that the AG's office as well as the federal victim witness program get the message that "all" victims of crime need protection. I received such a letter, responded that they were wrong. They sued anyway knowing full well they had made a mistake and sued anyway. Then a settlement requires that you not ask that criminal charges be made or that you will not be a witness against them in any criminal proceeding. With that your rights of a crime victim are gone which is also illegal and conceals the fraud. For those who were attacked and were truly innocent, the next time Justice asks you to be a witness or be a juror, treat justice as they have treated you as a victim of crime. Ignore them as a juror and witness and see just how they like it. It is the only way that Justice will protect the victim's of suits which were fraudulent

Add Comment

To add a comment without being a member, you may omit the password field, but you must enter your name (or nickname) along with your comment. * Denotes required fields.

Username: *


Password: (optional)
(Remember my login information: )

Comment: *


What is 6+2?: *