Monday, August 3, 2009

Set your VCRs (and TiVos): Tenenbaum goes primetime

In other Team Tenenbaum media appearances, here's an interview earlier today on WFMU with Tenenbaum counsel Charles Nesson (starts about 1:30:50 in). It's not exactly fair and balanced, but it's worth listening to for anyone who hasn't heard Nesson expound on the case in his own words.

UPDATE: Here's the transcript of Tenenbaum's appearance (along with the RIAA's Cara Duckworth) on Campbell Brown's show. Brown clearly did not buy Tenenbaum's "I support the artists" shtick:
BROWN: You listen to their music.

TENENBAUM: Absolutely.

BROWN: Don't you think they deserve to be compensated for it?

TENENBAUM: Oh, absolutely, Campbell. I've always held that artists deserve to be paid for their work. I -- I...

BROWN: And that's who you're stealing from.

TENENBAUM: Well, again, this -- this idea of stealing -- I think the -- the whole debate about file sharing as to whether or not it is beneficial or harmful and I don't even think it's necessarily the same amount of benefit for any given user. I think different users use file sharing different ways.

BROWN: But if you're not --

TENENBAUM: For example, if --

BROWN: Hold down a second. Because if you're not paying for it...


BROWN: ... how is that different? I don't understand.


  1. RE: Set your VCRs and TiVos.

    In other words, record the copyrighted content.

  2. Go ahead and engage in "'time-shifting' -- the practice of recording a program to view it once at a later time, and thereafter erasing it." Sony Corp. of Am. v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417, 423 (1984).

  3. At the bottom of the referenced Betamax decision...

    "[112] Like so many other problems created by the interaction of copyright law with a new technology, "[there] can be no really satisfactory solution to the problem presented here, until Congress acts." Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S., at 167 (dissenting opinion). But in the absence of a congressional solution, courts cannot avoid difficult problems by refusing to apply the law. We must "take the Copyright Act . . . as we find it," Fortnightly Corp. v. United Artists Television, Inc., 392 U.S., at 401-402, and "do as little damage as possible to traditional copyright principles . . . until the Congress legislates." Id., at 404 (dissenting opinion)."

    And still, Congress hasn't acted.

  4. A link to the transcript is below. One can only wonder whether Tenenbaum is deluded, a fool, or just very effectively playing the role that Nesson has created for him. No matter which, I hope both he and Nesson end up held seriously accountable.


Comments here are moderated. I appreciate substantive comments, whether or not they agree with what I've written. Stay on topic, and be civil. Comments that contain name-calling, personal attacks, or the like will be rejected. If you want to rant about how evil the RIAA and MPAA are, and how entertainment companies' employees and attorneys are bad people, there are plenty of other places for you to go.