Feeds

Harvard Prof.'s hearing against RIAA can't be streamed online

Appeals court reverses web broadcast decision

Top three mobile application threats

The local rules of the land will keep the Recording Industry of America (RIAA) free from having their high-profile case against Joel Tenenbaum broadcast live over the internet, a federal appeals court in Boston has ruled.

The First US Circuit Court of Appeals has blocked a trial judge from letting streaming coverage of the RIAA's lawsuit against the Boston University graduate, who's accused of illegally downloading and sharing songs on the Kazaa P2P network in 2004.

A three-judge panel said US District Judge Nancy Gertner's earlier decision to make an exception to a 1996 ban on the use of cameras in the circuit's courtrooms was "unprecedented," and "palpably incorrect."

The motion to stream proceedings on the web was proposed by Harvard Law School's increasingly erratic Charles Nesson and his gang of graduate students who are defending the accused P2P file-swapper. Nesson – who's adopted the unusual position that unlicensed P2P is "fair use" – claims the broadcast will show the public how the RIAA mistreats people it takes to court. The RIAA thinks Nesson's request is a self-serving stunt to make the trial a media circus.

In January, judge Gertner gave web cameras the nod, saying such a broadcast falls "squarely within the public interest." The RIAA appealed the decision claiming it violated federal court guidelines on cameras and threatened its right to a fair trial.

Judge Bruce Selya, who penned the appeals court opinion, appeared to sympathize with Gertner's decision in spirit, stating it's decision "is not a case about free speech writ large, nor about the guaranty of a fair trial, nor about any cognizable constitutional right of public access to the courts" but instead a confined enforcement of "the rule of law."

In a concurring opinion, Judge Kermit Lipez said the outcome was "disagreeable" and the rule banning online streaming should be reexamined.

A copy of the court's decision is available here. ®

Top three mobile application threats

More from The Register

next story
Dropbox defends fantastically badly timed Condoleezza Rice appointment
'Nothing is going to change with Dr. Rice's appointment,' file sharer promises
Audio fans, prepare yourself for the Second Coming ... of Blu-ray
High Fidelity Pure Audio – is this what your ears have been waiting for?
Did a date calculation bug just cost hard-up Co-op Bank £110m?
And just when Brit banking org needs £400m to stay afloat
Sorry London, Europe's top tech city is Munich
New 'Atlas of ICT Activity' finds innovation isn't happening at Silicon Roundabout
MtGox chief Karpelès refuses to come to US for g-men's grilling
Bitcoin baron says he needs another lawyer for FinCEN chat
Zucker punched: Google gobbles Facebook-wooed Titan Aerospace
Up, up and away in my beautiful balloon flying broadband-bot
Apple DOMINATES the Valley, rakes in more profit than Google, HP, Intel, Cisco COMBINED
Cook & Co. also pay more taxes than those four worthies PLUS eBay and Oracle
prev story

Whitepapers

Designing a defence for mobile apps
In this whitepaper learn the various considerations for defending mobile applications; from the mobile application architecture itself to the myriad testing technologies needed to properly assess mobile applications risk.
3 Big data security analytics techniques
Applying these Big Data security analytics techniques can help you make your business safer by detecting attacks early, before significant damage is done.
Five 3D headsets to be won!
We were so impressed by the Durovis Dive headset we’ve asked the company to give some away to Reg readers.
The benefits of software based PBX
Why you should break free from your proprietary PBX and how to leverage your existing server hardware.
Securing web applications made simple and scalable
In this whitepaper learn how automated security testing can provide a simple and scalable way to protect your web applications.