tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post2050611544817947863..comments2024-01-23T07:34:52.253-08:00Comments on Copyrights & Campaigns: Tenenbaum files supplemental summary judgment opposition on fair use issue: Don't apply law to Net's 'global ocean of free bits'Ben Sheffnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06477793715765992689noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-52141198947953786172009-07-20T14:53:07.121-07:002009-07-20T14:53:07.121-07:00@Anonymous 10:21:
I am told that Judge Gertner sa...@Anonymous 10:21:<br /><br />I am told that Judge Gertner said at this morning's pretrial conference that she intends to rule on the labels' fair use summary judgment motion by mid-week.Ben Sheffnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06477793715765992689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-88247584020122612009-07-20T11:14:31.934-07:002009-07-20T11:14:31.934-07:00I am well aware that there are two sides to every ...I am well aware that there are two sides to every story. Having heard Mr. Tenebaum's side of the story as articulated by Mr. Nesson, I can only shake my head in utter disbelief at the legal arguments being presented by Mr. Nesson.<br /><br />Perhaps Mr. Nesson would do well to have his submittals to the court parsed by a second set of "eyes" who has actually read and closely studied the very cases relied upon by Mr. Nesson. If Mr. Nesson actually believes that the basis he asserts for a fair use defense has merit, I can only hope for his sake that this case does not proceed on appeal to the Supreme Court and arguments heard. I am not sanguine he would be able to deal with a 9-0 decision in favor of the rights holders.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-74184263039179019182009-07-20T10:21:14.759-07:002009-07-20T10:21:14.759-07:00Judge Gertner issued an order today that she was h...Judge Gertner issued an order today that she was holding the fair use motion "under advisement." That's incredible. I'm assuming that is, for now, the same as denying it. If she was going to decide it before trial, you'd think she would not say anything or say when she would rule on it. But this seems to mean that she is going to let in evidence on it and potentially decide it after trial (or right before jury instructions). That seems crazy given the papers filed on the issue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-70864630545384952692009-07-20T09:12:57.483-07:002009-07-20T09:12:57.483-07:00Is this defense so bad it is actually prejudicial ...Is this defense so bad it is actually prejudicial to the defendant's right to a fair trial?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-25593436323290209932009-07-20T08:03:45.098-07:002009-07-20T08:03:45.098-07:00These aren't briefs. These are press releases...These aren't briefs. These are press releases. And it doesn't matter whether they are accepted or rejected; they were filed, and now they're part of public record, and the apparatus of the court system has been turned into Charlie Nesson's mouthpiece.halojones-fanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05473935330204075559noreply@blogger.com