eon

wayne\'s tweets

no ruling yet on whether wayne will be allowed to testify

but please, read this
thank you wayne, however this goes

The Pirate Bay is now getting acquired by Swedish firm Global Gaming Factory X AB (GGF), according to announcements by both companies. The price tag is 60 million Swedish kronor ($7.83 million, 5.5 million euros at current exchange rates). GGF disclosed the intended buyout in Stockholm this morning.

congratulations on bringing us so far. let the process of innovation go on. we don’t compete with money. selling out is not a sin

Excerpt of Remarks to RIAA/MPAA Joint Luncheon

… Joel’s supporters have a have a bold vision for the future. They see an open net, an artistic culture of sharing and collaboration, a culture of unbridled creativity and innovation. Beyond this, they see the net as a means of reorganizing and democratizing society; of breaking down centralized power structures and propaganda systems, and of breaking out of outmoded mores and traditions. They argue that existing intellectual property law stands as an obstacle to their imagined future and the benefits it promises.

The fact is that openness, creativity, innovation, collaboration and freedom are all desirable goals. If we are seen as opposing these things, we will lose. Joel’s supporters have framed this as a battle between the future, which they represent, and the past, which we represent. Our challenge is to demonstrate that Joel’s supporters have not set a realistic path for achieving these goals, but that we can.
To do so, we must first be honest with ourselves. Our industry is, to borrow a phrase from social science, “path dependant.” Our options for future evolution are constrained by the inertia of the systems we have developed over the past century. Countless peoples’ time and resources have been devoted to developing this way of creating and distributing art and culture. This is not simply a matter of sunk costs and it encompasses more than just our shareholders, our employees and our artists. It encompasses the local economies of which we are the lifeblood, the human capital, the specialized expertise developed to produce our products, the distribution networks, infrastructure, financing systems, talent scouting and on and on.

What the internet vanguard fails to recognize is the extent to which they too are dependent on this path. We represent more than just a way of doing business—we are the way culture is financed and created in our society. Joel’s supporters believe that we can simply be consigned to the dustbin of history—as if having reached the top rung you could saw off the ladder beneath yourself. They ignore the enormous downside risk to abandoning this path. Starve us of revenue and musicians are not paid, movies are not made, and the engine for cultural production collapses. Without the mass culture we create, there would be no shared experience to forge our national identity; to serve as the glue that holds our society together; to enable us to relate to one another in a meaningful way. Without mass-culture there would be no counter-culture. Without the art we create, what would there be to share, to borrow, to respond to, to remix, and to define oneself in opposition to? Art and information must be, for lack of a better word, commodified in order to be organized and integrated into a coherent social fabric.

Our copyright laws are imperfectly suited to the realities of the internet and must be reformed. However, if we did not resist the virtually unlimited free distribution of our products that is taking place over the internet, we would be bankrupt long before any reasonable accommodation could be reached. Joel’s supporters must recognize that our industry plays a vital role in fueling the creativity of the open net. In turn, we must recognize that the collaborative net culture creates genuine value. Together, we must find a way to harness and monetize this creativity and innovation without dislocating everything that has come before. …

the copyleft letter noticed by ben sheffner’s blog looks like a fake to me. i like its actual request and the reason given for it:

We urge you to create offices in relevant agencies … whose dedicated role is to promote innovation and advance the cause of progress in the useful sciences.

But it all looks like sham to cover an apparent concession that the copyright czar whom obama appoints should limit her focus to copyright enforcement instead of creating a balance with the natural public force of the net.

The first occupant of this position would naturally be more focused only upon certain aspects of IP policy — namely, organizing IP law enforcement efforts.

who wrote this? who in each of the listed organizations signed on to this?

who at EFF, Internet Archive, Public Knowledge, WikiMedia Foundation

?

very bad things happen when you put law enforcement in the copyright giant’s hands

:<(

save wayne

Forwarded conversation
Subject: radiohead
————————

From: Charles Nesson
Date: Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:06 AM
To: Isaac Meister , Matthew Sanchez , Anna Volftsun , Debbie Rosenbaum

would each of you please write me an account of our meeting with brian message
my recorder malfunctioned

———-
From: Anna Volftsun
Date: Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:53 AM
To:  nesson at law.harvard.edu

Professor Nesson,

I dont remember the exact details, but the gist of it was:
He talked about how the UK is moving towards an alternate model of music distribution (from BPI, which is their version of the RIAA). This model does not involve record labels at all and encourages, or at least allows, file-sharing. He mentioned working with an artists organization of about 200 groups. The UK is currently soliciting reactions and opinions on its proposal to amend the copyright laws. The matter was put to a vote in the artists organization and they almost unanimously voted to allow file-sharing rather than have it be penalized by copyright law.

–

is there any evidence that any members of congress knew at the time they passed the 1999 Digital Theft Deterrence Act that the recording industry was intending to use the statute as a basis for suing its music fans

is there any evidence that riaa and company were intending to so use the statute once they got it passed

Forwarded conversation
Subject: riaa
————————

Mr.Nesson

First, let me applaud you on your stance against the riaa. My daughter is a student at Case Western. She as also received a letter demanding $4100. before Jan. 19 or face legal action. Since the school did not fight the request and handed over the students i.p addresses. They have referred her to an attorney. When she contacted him he wanted $5000 for a retainer. 21 students received the letters, that’s over $100,000. My wife is an employee of the school which is the only way we could afford to send her there. I understand you cannot give legal advice,(I have spoken to Mr. Beckerman in N.Y). I can scrape together the $4100 to keep her out of court, Do you feel I will have any recourse to recover anything once you win your case and declare this witch-hunt unconstitutional ?

Good luck and stick it to those greedy !@$#@!

Dale English

———-
From: Charles Nesson
Date: Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 10:16 AM
To: dynamictool

joel is prepared to stand as a representative for the class of all on whom the oppression of the recording industry’s litigation campaign has fallen. i, together with my students, am prepared to represent him in that capacity, and thus to represent you. we are working on the preparation or our class action counterclaim as we speak.
–

——
when appropriate (in my judgment) to an open project and not sensitive (in my judgment) in terms of privacy, i may post email to my blog. all privacy requests respected.

To: Cary Sherman

hi cary,

thanks for your note. i don’t really understand why you are continuing the litigation, but if that’s your position then i ask you to agree to our motion, just filed, to admit internet to the courtroom, and then to join with me in making the trial the best possible example of civil discourse within the rules of federal civil procedure.

happy holidaze
best to you and family from me and fern

listen

From: Joel Tenenbaum
Date: Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 8:52 AM
Subject: [cyberone-riaa] [Fwd: riaa]

Interesting…

“Indeed, many in the music industry felt the lawsuits had outlived their
usefulness.”

UK ISPs were ordered earlier this year [and in 2007] by the High Court to disclose information relating to its customer’s data, based on information provided to them by amongst others, video games companies. The information sought was based on the customer’s IP address. Pursuant to CPR 31.18, lawyers applied for an order that the ISPs disclose the full name, postal address and telephone number of the subscriber of each of the IP addresses supplied.

The game plan was to match each IP address with an individual and write to them with a hefty threatening letter and a request for £500-600. If this sum was not paid, court action was threatened, costing tens of thousands of pounds. It all seemed fairly conclusive. The ISPs complied and the Lawyers [Davenport Lyons] commenced the enormous task of writing to over (so we understand) 25,000 potential infringers.

read on

http://torrentfreak.com/accused-of-illegal-file-sharing-complain-to-the-government-081205/