Law Profs File Friend-of-Court Brief Against RIAA 186
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "A group of 10 copyright law professors has filed an amicus curiae ('friend of the court') brief on the side of the defendant in Capitol v. Thomas, agreeing with the judge's recent decision that the $222,000 verdict won by the RIAA appears to be tainted by a 'manifest error of law.' The clear and well-written 14-page brief (PDF) argues that the 'making available' jury instruction, which the RIAA had requested and the judge ultimately accepted, was in fact a 'manifest error of law,' making the point, among others, that an interpretation of a statute should begin with the words of the statute. My only criticism of the brief is that it overstates the authorities relied on by the RIAA, citing cases which never decided the 'making available' issue as cases which had decided it in the RIAA's favor."
As it turns out, the MPAA, close ally to the RIAA, has come forth with a more controversial view. They suggest that proof of actual distribution shouldn't be required. From their brief (PDF): "Mandating that proof could thus have the pernicious effect of depriving copyright owners of a practical remedy against massive copyright infringement in many instances."
RIAA has it so tough, and never gets what it wants (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, certainly! If RIAA accuses someone of breaking a law, it is certainly a terrible burden on them to have to prove that, following the actual wording of the law Congress chose, an offense actually happened. Who among us hasn't had the same problem, from time to time?
If I went to Alice's bank, and demanded that they give me all of her money, because Alice died and left it to me, it would be a great hardship for me to have to show that Alice actually died, and actually willed the money as I claimed. Why, with the onerous burden of proof in my lap, I might not be able to collect anything! Just because there's an outside chance that she's still alive and doesn't know me from Adam doesn't mean that the bank shouldn't take my word for it.
I can say, absolutely honestly, that I have more sympathy with RIAA on this issue, than I have ever had with them on any other. Just don't ask me to prove it.
Re:Really? (Score:5, Funny)
If they can't prove the distribution, then how do they know the copyright infringement is happening?
Re:Wow. get a load of that. proof not required (Score:5, Funny)
In addition, I will testify against them.
with apologies to monty python. (Score:3, Funny)
"Quiet, quiet! There are ways of telling if she is a witch. Tell me. What do you do with witches?"
"Burn them!"
"And what else do you burn?"
"More witches! Um... Wood!"
"Does wood sink in water?"
"No! No! It floats!"
"And what else floats in water?"
"A duck!"
"So, logically..."
"If she weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of wood! And therefore... a witch! Burn her!"
all the "proof" you need.
Well... (Score:3, Funny)
I don't know whether to be worried or relieved. It worries me that a judge somewhere is going to buy into that, at which point we can all kiss "innocent until proven guilty" goodbye. On the other hand this could turn out very well indeed if they get laughed out of court and be made to play by the same rules as everyone else.
Re:Boycott CD's and DVD's (Score:4, Funny)
So what you want to say is that the more insane copyright laws get, the more people download content illegally?
Hey, I have a really weird idea how to solve that problem and make both sides happy!
And in other news... (Score:3, Funny)
Five congenital liars, a serial killer, six child molesters, several sewer rats and a starving weasel applied to the same court for status as "Friends of the RIAA".
Re:Wow. get a load of that. proof not required (Score:5, Funny)
Obligatory Liar Liar (Score:3, Funny)
Fletcher: "Your honor, I object!"
Judge Stevens: "Why?"
Fletcher: "Because it's devastating to my case!"
Judge Stevens: "Over-ruled."
Fletcher: "Good call!"
Re:Wow. get a load of that. proof not required (Score:4, Funny)
And the mere fact that they chose not to respond to these allegations (of child abuse, child pornography and treason) is proof of their guilt.
I'll get the rope.
Re:with apologies to monty python. (Score:4, Funny)
IIRC, the woman in that quote actually was a witch, and also actually did weight the same as a duck, so I'm not sure what, exactly, you're trying to make fun of.
Re:Wow. get a load of that. proof not required (Score:4, Funny)
At one point we needed too much proof so we started printing a lot of it; proof then went down in value due to inflation and is now lower than the US Dollar.