# Judge Approves Public Broadcast Of RIAA Lawsuit



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

"Harvard Law prof. Charlie Nesson has been leading a case challenging the constitutionality of a core part of the RIAA's continuing lawsuit strategy. Late last year, he asked a judge if the trial itself could be broadcast live over the internet, noting that the RIAA claimed the lawsuits were part of its education campaign, so he couldn't see why they would object. Of course, they did object, but the judge has sided with Nesson, and the court proceedings will be broadcast live next Thursday, January 22nd on the Berkman Center's website. The judge repeated Nesson's points in responding to the RIAA's objection, noting that the RIAA's objection seemed "curious" considering its previous claims of this being an educational campaign."
http://techdirt.com/articles/20090114/2208363419.shtml


----------



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

"We've already discussed how badly the RIAA does not want the pretrial hearings in the Tenenbaum case to be broadcast -- as was requested by Tenenbaum's lawyers, and approved by the judge in the case. However, the reasoning from the RIAA is pretty laughable. Apparently, it's afraid that (gasp!) some of these tech savvy propaganda-ists out there might remix the video and "manipulate" it to take RIAA arguments out of context."
http://techdirt.com/articles/20090120/2007243470.shtml

It is quite the geek that can remix a live broadcast on the fly.


----------



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

"Attorneys for Tenenbaum wanted the webcast because streaming the hearing would allow the public to participate in the trial. The RIAA vehemently opposed the request because they feel the trial publicity could actually sway a potential jury pool."
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/41147/118/


----------

