Earlier this week, Ars Technica ran an opinion piece by RIAA general counsel Steven Marks that responded to a similar piece the week before by Harvard law professor Charles Nesson. Nesson, who is representing Joel Tenenbaum in litigation initiated by RIAA against him for illegal file-sharing, made some bold claims in his essay about his controversial defense of Tenenbaum, which argues that peer-to-peer sharing of entire copyrighted works is fair use.
Nesson, who offers little in his essay to defend his characterization of P2P sharing as fair use, calls Tenenbaum a David versus the Goliath of the RIAA and he refers to himself as a David versus the Goliath of "traditional legal norms."
Not so fast, Marks wrote in his essay of the Tenenbaum trial:
More importantly, Marks writes at length about the music industry's commitment to stemming illegal piracy by making it irrelevant. He says:
We couldn't agree more.
But whether you agree or disagree with the RIAA, you should read Marks' entire essay here. It is truly one of the more compelling and well-presented cases I've seen about the tricky situation entertainment companies find themselves in with piracy, the thinking behind their litigation strategy, and the efforts they're making to move forward to bring more high-quality content online through efficient, safe, and legal means.
Nesson, who offers little in his essay to defend his characterization of P2P sharing as fair use, calls Tenenbaum a David versus the Goliath of the RIAA and he refers to himself as a David versus the Goliath of "traditional legal norms."
Not so fast, Marks wrote in his essay of the Tenenbaum trial:
[It's] a crusade waged by a Harvard professor to gut the copyright laws that protect creators and his attempt to transform a courtroom into a "three-ring circus." Professor Nesson seeks a revolution, not a resolution or a real defense of his client. For a music community severely harmed by illegal music downloading, including thousands of working class folks out of jobs, this is no ivory tower exercise.
More importantly, Marks writes at length about the music industry's commitment to stemming illegal piracy by making it irrelevant. He says:
Let's be clear: the best anti-piracy strategy is a vibrant legitimate marketplace rich with content and innovative business models. We get that.
[...]
We fully recognize that online theft will always be an unfortunate challenge to our industry. Our job is to provide the right incentives to bring it under sufficient control so that this emerging legal market can reach its potential.
We couldn't agree more.
But whether you agree or disagree with the RIAA, you should read Marks' entire essay here. It is truly one of the more compelling and well-presented cases I've seen about the tricky situation entertainment companies find themselves in with piracy, the thinking behind their litigation strategy, and the efforts they're making to move forward to bring more high-quality content online through efficient, safe, and legal means.
Leave a comment