That is great I have wondered the same thing about why student do not file
brief, when our rights are being walked upon. I am willing to help in the
process if we want to identify some case to file briefs on.
Sincerely,
Brian Rowe
1L Seattle University of Law
Founder
Freedom for IP
www.FreedomforIP.org
On 3/22/07, Dana Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I just got this response from an IP professor here at Stanford and thought
you guys might appreciate it. Perhaps now is the time with the recent RIAA
threat letters sent to university students (front page news out here re:
Berkeley).
Dana
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Roberta J Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mar 22, 2007 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: WSJ: layperson's perspective on digital copyright
To: Dana Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Absolutely. Among the things I have long wondered is why
STUDENTS don't at least file amicus briefs in some of the more
outrageous copyright cases, for example the photocopying
decisions in the 1990s. Or why STUDENTS don't organize to file a
declaratory junction action against the record companies all
sending them the nasty letters these days. My sad answer back in
the 90s was that (1) student status is transient and (2) the
amount they pay (for coursepacks, for downloading music) is a
small number when expressed as a percentage of university
tuition. But that only explains why they don't seem to care, not
why they should not care. If they are the REAL PARTY IN INTEREST
(as they were in the coursepack cases), they ought to be in court
as parties with equities that are relevant to a fair use
analysis.
If you and SLATA want to fight the good fight, count me
as a supporter or more.
Best regards,
RJM
--------------------------------------------------------
Roberta J. Morris
Lecturer, Stanford University Law School
Room 208
650-723-9505
--------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Dana Powers wrote:
>
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB117452094467244796-o__iG26sDKdHa_cPBr2vmb4dsjY_20080321.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top
>
> The thrust of which is that Congress needs to be more clear about what
is
> acceptable in the digital age. I would add that when Congress does
decide
> to do something the voice of the people - as listeners, bloggers,
> booty-shakers, home DJs, students and friends - must be
present. Various
> other groups have claimed to represent "the people" in the past -
typically
> distributors - but it is not clear to me that their interests have ever
> aligned properly with the rest of us. Particularly in the digital age
where
> everything is a copy, first-sale is gone, everything is licensed, and
> click-wrap licenses are the norm, particularly now the people need to be
at
> the table, and not as Google Users or Viacom Shareholders.
>
> dp
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
--
Brian Rowe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Access To Justice Technology Principles
www.atjtechprinciples.org
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
