(oops, that should read "eventually convicted" where it says "eventually accused")
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Brook Hinton <bhin...@gmail.com> wrote: > (full caveat - son of an attorney, fanatical > fair-use/collage/transformative use advocate) > > Lawyers are hired by clients. Their job is to help their clients "win", > REGARDLESS of the lawyer's personal belief. A lawyer who defends an > eventually accused murderer in court is not "pro murder". A lawyer who > prosecutes someone who it turns out was wrongly accused of a crime isn't > against due process. It's an adversarial system by law, designed that way > with the idea that truth comes out when each side has an advocate whose job > is to defend/prosecute to the absolute best of their abilities. > If this fellow was a judge and had issued rulings on the matter, that would > be different, but the fact that this fellow did what he was hired to do in a > firm hired by the RIAA doesn't make me worry that he is pro-rigid copyright. > > Though to be fair, there probably is an argument to be made > that successful, late career lawyers who choose to practice in a certain > area are another matter as they might have the option to choose a particular > practice. But there would still be a grey area. > > Obama's ties to and interest in the arts community and his early actions > connected to the arts make me optimistic that the new administration will > support strengthening fair use. > > Brook > > > > _______________________________________________________ > Brook Hinton > film/video/audio art > www.brookhinton.com > studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab > -- _______________________________________________________ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
