RIAA Explanation For Not Wanting Court Broadcast: Those Geeks Might Remix It

from the context-is-king dept

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. Of course, in saying so, the RIAA has now pretty much guaranteed that's what will happen, but... that still shouldn't matter. We know the RIAA is against the whole concept of remixing, but we thought that was a copyright issue, not one where they actually think that such remixes are universally taken as fact. I wonder if the folks at the RIAA think that things like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report are serious news programs rather than satire...


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    SteveD, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 2:16am

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    icepick314, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 2:34am

    isn't the supposed broadcast supposed to be streamed live?

    how do you "remix" live broadcast?

    doesn't the case coverage be like any other coverage from Court TV?

    WTF, RIAA?!??!?!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 3:02am

    out of contexte?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 3:04am

    out of context?

    how about all head lines most of the press use to attract readers?

    are they going to request liberty of speech to be revoked?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    AJ, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 4:24am

    real reason

    Don't you know the REAL reason? They don't want the world to see the broadcast of them getting their butts kicked in court -- ahh the humiliation!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    inc, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 4:32am

    Re:

    you can capture a live broadcast then edit it then post it on youtube. this is what the RIAA doesn't want.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    eleete, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 4:35am

    In Context

    "some of these tech savvy propaganda-ists out there might remix the video and "manipulate" it to take RIAA arguments out of context."

    It's so much funnier when it's in context.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Haywood, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 4:54am

    Re: icepick314

    You obviously aren't one of the tech savvy propaganda-ists.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 4:54am

    Re:

    Um, you can record *any* broadcast. Streaming does not mean someone smart won't have a copy, or make one.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 5:13am

    I thought they where thinking about the children!

    or

    They did not want the copyrighted evidence illegal distributed on the internet.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Sheesh, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 5:22am

    As opposed to text

    Certainly, none of the geeks out there would dare to manipulate text of the proceedings.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    ben, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 5:40am

    Official Copy

    I guess then the RIAA could put out an official copy of it, couldn't they? And who says the RIAA wouldn't alter that copy to their advantage?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    icon
    Steve R. (profile), Jan 21st, 2009 @ 5:48am

    Public Entitled to the Court Proceedings

    It seems that the discussion is overlooking the issue that court proceedings in most cases are PUBLIC. (see note below) Consequently the RIAA is attempting to squelch free speech.

    Though focusing on REMIX speaks of the absurdity of the RIAA position it leaves us "stuck" with looking at this from a copyright issue, that clearly does not apply. We need to take a more aggressive stance by saying that the RIAA is attempting to reduce our rights to participate (by listening) in an open court proceeding.

    In the WIRED article In Internet First, RIAA File Sharing Hearing to Be Webcast David Kravets wrote: "The ruling is groundbreaking. Federal trial courts rarely, if ever, permit still pictures or live feeds from their courtrooms, though appeals courts are more open. Most states allow some type of photography, and vest the decision exclusively with the judge presiding over the case." So there is some "maneuvering room" for the RIAA. Nevertheless, here we have an organization that wants ethical behavior on the consumers part demanding that it has a right to squelch freedom of speech, a fundamental right that we are entitled too. Very hypocritical.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    TDR, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 6:56am

    Nice try, RIAA - but it won't fly.


    "We gladly feast on those who would subdue us."

    -the Addams family motto

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    Evil Mike, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 7:46am

    Re:

    "Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectatos Nunc"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    GeneralEmergency (profile), Jan 21st, 2009 @ 9:26am

    Finish this joke, please...

    "How do you know an RIAA lawyer is lying?"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased), Jan 21st, 2009 @ 9:34am

    Re: Finish this joke, please...

    They're talking!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 11:02am

    Re:

    lol Talk about not thinking out a post first.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 11:51am

    To those euphoric few who may view this as a victory of sorts, you have obviously never sat in a court as either counsel or observer. Motion proceedings are as enjoyable to watch as it feels to repeatedly stick your hand with an ice pick.

    After the "OJ" debacle some years ago, I well understand why the overwhelming majority of judges give a resounding thumbs down to cameras in the courtroom.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    John Duncan Yoyo, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 12:24pm

    Re: In Context

    >"some of these tech savvy propaganda-ists out there might >"remix the video and "manipulate" it to take RIAA arguments >out of context."


    The Remix -
    might it take some RIAA propaganda-ists to remix the video arguments of these tech savvy out there to manipulate and out of context?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 4:10pm

    Re: Finish this joke, please...

    They're alive.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Mr Big Content, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 4:40pm

    Not The Same Thing At All

    I can see where they're coming from. Programs like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report are legitimately-licensed programs, with an officially-accredited sense of humour. Whereas release stuff like this on the Internet, and any Tom, Dick and Harry, with who knows what idea of a joke, might do anything they like with it. I mean, have you seen some of the things people find funny, when they're left to themselves? It's obvious you can't have that. Satire needs to be carefully managed.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    identicon
    Brad, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 5:58pm

    I fully plan to remix it, but onto my next Trance CD. I'll play the arguments, in their entirety, on my tracks. I'll just put a nice back beat behind it. I'll call it "Music Wants to Own You" and I'll go ahead and seed it myself.

    Can I get in trouble for seeding my own content? I'm betting my ISP won't know the difference.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 23rd, 2009 @ 9:45am

    Re:

    I well understand why the overwhelming majority of judges give a resounding thumbs down

    Uhm... why? Because no one wants to watch them? As noted above, these are public proceeedings. why should those who want to witness them be denied access because others find it less-than-enjoyable. I, for one, look forward to seeing this hearing because i'm honestly interested in the case, not because I'm looking to be entertained.

    Related: can a hand motion really 'resound'?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 23rd, 2009 @ 9:47am

    Re:

    I'll go ahead and seed it myself.

    If done right, I'd buy that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This