Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1. 

   SteveD, Jan 21st, 2009 @ 2:16am

   
   

   Its definitely a risk... http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=CvvhDngERXo&feature=related

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

2. 

   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. 

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

   
   

   out of contexte?

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

4. 

   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. 

   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. 

   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. 

   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. 

   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. 

   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. 

    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. 

    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. 

    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. 

    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. 

    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. 

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

    
    

    Re:

    "Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectatos Nunc"

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

16. 

    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. 

    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. 

    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. 

    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. 

    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. 

    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. 

    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. 

    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. 

    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. 

    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