RIAA Suing Student For $1 Million, Harvard Law Professor Comes to His Aid

RIAA Suing Student For $1 Million, Harvard Law Professor Comes to His Aid

Back in October, Joel Tenenbaum, an undergraduate at Boston University, received a notice from the copyright infringement boogieman, also known as the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), that he was being sued for illegally downloading and sharing copyrighted music.

 

Today, in a Rhode Island federal court, Harvard Law School Professor Charles Nesson will defend Tenenbaum, who is facing a hefty $1 million fine for sharing seven songs through the peer-to-peer application Kazaa (who knew it stilled existed?!).

 

Naturally, given the absurdity of the fine, the crux of Nesson’s argument heading into today’s trial is that the RIAA is extorting random file-sharers for the sake of fear mongering.

 

The Profy reports:

At the time of alleged infringement Joel was a teenager and his sharing of songs, while illegal, is exactly what the majority of teenagers still do around the world. More than that, I am quite sure Joel was not the only person sharing music files in Kazaa at the time - yet he is the only one chosen by RIAA to sue. So I think it is quite obvious that the purpose behind this particular lawsuit is neither to punish this particular person, nor to compensate for the copyright infringement - instead they merely want to use Joel’s case as an example of what trouble you can get yourself into by sharing a handful of songs online.

One-million dollars for seven songs? Really?

 

If the RIAA is trying to hide their ulterior motives, they’re doing a poor job of it.

 

Still, for students and members of the file-sharing community, this case will be one to watch. If Nesson and Tenenbaum succeed in their countersuit, it could strike a major blow to the RIAA's questionable practices.

 

Show your support for Joel and company by joining this Facebook group.
 

+ 2 comments

Related Posts

Comments

Anonymous
Both the RIAA and Directv have sued people whom they knew were innocent. When an innocent person is sued it means that false information was provided the court.
While the person sued tries to report this false information given to the court, the court does nothing. Reporting to the Justice department as well goes no where. As a consequence, law enforcement has to be sent the message that there is no one above the laws. The next time you are a Juror or a witness, do just what Justice does in these cases, Ignore Justice. Jury nullification is a great way to give back just what Justice did to the innocent person who was sued.
Posted 12/15/2008 3:11 PMReply
Anonymous
love your biased presentation! lol EVIL RIAA... nothing like a little good ol' brainwashing (but hey, the major media is currently addicted to it, so why not?) but anyway, right away I thought of a counter suit for the kid, it goes like this: say it can be shown that, by sharing the songs, the kid's friends then purchased merchandise, say a total of two CD's, three t-shirts, and a ballcap, a portion of the proceeds making it back to the said complainants, who are suing the kid; the kid can therefore counter sue for compensation, $1 million, of course, for his marketing efforts on their behalf in the form of broadening their product's exposure and generating new revenue(I say "product", for such investment-minded vermin surely do not view their property as art or artists). So, a few bucks lost, a few bucks gained, and the counter suits should, if justice is served, likewise cancel each other out. Posted 04/03/2009 4:48 PMReply

Add a comment

Anonymous comment

Please enter the code or log in.

Facebook Comment