Not only are the record companies opposing the request, they're asking the Judge not to even read it.

Isn't this standard lawyer behavior? Objecting to everything the other side does?

When some vegetable can become president of a nation, why shouldn't a bearded guy in his 50s become Miss America?

This brings up the rather good point that civil discovery is a startlingly invasive process conducted by people who are hostile. While some discovery leads to evidence which is admitted and becomes public, the vast bulk does not.

Some sorts of safeguards are required for this material. Traditionally, this has been up to attornies having professional ethics. A dubious proposition in some cases. Perhaps some sort of "fruit of the poisoned vine" is required for civil evidence.

Where's the mafiaa tag???

no one said s/he was a guy...

I think this deserves an insightful mod. :)

Ray, instead of being modded down for that reply, we should mod you up both for your work in this area and for submitting the article.

BTW, I may have mentioned this before, but thanks for your efforts here, and for causing me to rethink my view on lawyers. (the subject line of this thread says it all-'re:Damn Lawyers') You are a gem.
It's easy to lose sight of some of the good trees in the dark, creepy forest of our legal system nowadays.

As a side note, I have decided to contribute my tax return $$'s to EFF and several similar ongoing efforts we all benefit from.
I call on all /.'ers to make a small, similar effort. If we have the numbers and power to reduce servers to a molten ruin (the /. effect!), then there are enough of us to throw $5-10 bucks at the grunts on the front line- come on y'all, let's show the world the mighty power that is /.!!!
Yeah, a little over the top, but this IS a pep talk!

Dude, you're not exactly hurting for karma.

ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR GOURD?

Ahh...you are. Nevermind...but this

...from the previous poster is absurd. It's not a good idea. The fact is a lot of artists would lose a lot of money, and we're not talking income here necessarily. Many of them may not be able to "pay off" their advances.

Kill the RIAA? Sure. Kill the major labels and their evil machine? Absolutely. But somebody please think of the childr...er...artists!

99% of lawyers give the rest a bad name.

-

we don't need 'artists'. its an expensive idea that we have a new solution for.

outsource.

some guy (or girl) in india is willing to play that song or sing it for 1/3 to 1/100 of the US cost.

as a software guy who watches his field erode to outsourcing, I say (sincerely) - outsource the 'arts' too!

no one has a 'right' to make enormous amounts of money. and today, no one has a 'right' to even earn a living. I'm sure many slashdotters would agree if they've ever had to train their replacement..

I'm half serious. the entertainment industry thinks they have a 'right' to continue the same old ways. I don't get that right as an engineer. why should 'artists', then?

I don't feel any more sorry for artists or ceo's whose business model is not valid anymore - since there is no one in society to worry about US!

the arts won't die. only the money-grubbing parasites will die or be forced to find another 'business'. and good riddance, too.

the built-in protection is not fair across the board for all working people. I see no reason to give 'artists' a free pass when the rest of us are suffering in a failing economy.