Obama Taps 5th RIAA Lawyer to Justice Dept.

[populistdriven]

President Barack Obama is tapping another RIAA attorney into the Justice Department.

Monday's naming of Ian Gershengorn, to become the department's deputy assistant attorney of the Civil Division, comes more than a week after nearly two-dozen public interest groups, trade pacts and library coalitions urged the new president to quit filling his administration with lawyers plucked from the Recording Industry Association of America.

The move makes it five RIAA lawyers Obama has appointed to the Justice Department.


Gershengorn, left, a partner with RIAA-firm Jenner & Block, represented the labels against Grokster (.pdf) and will be in charge of the DOJ Federal Programs Branch. That's the unit that just told a federal judge the Obama administration supports monetary damages as high as $150,000 per purloined music track on a peer-to-peer file sharing program.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/04/obama-taps-fift.html

This makes me :( But overall Obama has exceeded my expectations (and I worked my butt off to elect him).

[Sebastian Doyle]

1. What the FUCK??

I'm sure the cheerleaders will dogpile on me for this, but this is fucking ridiculous.

Bush & Cheney get away with war crimes.

Ted Stevens gets away with his crimes.

Telecommunications corporations get away with their complicity in illegal wiretapping.

But a bunch of FUCKING NAZI PIGS WHO HARRASS PEOPLE FOR USING THE 21ST CENTURY EQUIVALENT OF FM RADIO are promoted to the highest law enforcement positions in the land.


Nice goddamn priorities, Mr. President. :eyes:

[populistdriven]

3. That is an interesting way to put it. Frankly I have a higher opinion of pigs than any RIAA lawyer.

Obama has made it clear he intends to have the Washington corporate power politics on his side to push his agenda. An agenda that I in general ovewhelmingly support. He has made it crystal clear he doesn't think he can accomplish it all with grassroots power. Perhaps this shows how determined he is.

With compromises like this all I can say the agenda better happen. He better fucking deliver.

[ThomCat]

74. Seriously. Couldn't he find any lawyers with careers serving

the public good to call upon? He has to fill the government with corporate pirates?

This is not what we voted for? How can people sit back and see all the shit decisions he has been making and still cheer-lead for this man as if he was the second coming of Christ?

He's a damned politician, and he's turning out to be a politician with a whole lot more corporate ties than populist ones. So much for the great community organizer.

[populistdriven]

94. that is kind of harsh considering we have no policy to criticize

for all we know he may want these RIAA lawyers on his side (working for him) to give him insight into just how much they may be willing to compromise. Or this may just be to satisfy their powerful lobbying group.

Personally I still trust Obama to have consumers best interests at heart before the RIAA. We do need to fight for our interests and that includes protesting the presence (in general) of RIAA's lawyers inside this administration. Some or all of them may be of broad vision and not loyal at all to the RIAA. At the very least they are very informed as to what the RIAA considers is necessary to protect their property rights. This should make us uneasy and we should question and challenge it but any condemnation is premature.

[TK421]

105. This is one of those times I wish I could rec a post...this would be it

:thumbsup: Nice priorities, indeed....and I am thoroughly disgusted

[Uzybone]

2. One side of the story

The other side:

"He has also served as counsel of record in numerous amicus briefs before the Court, including a brief on behalf of the defense industry addressing government contracting practices, and a brief in connection with litigation over the Ten Commandments.

Mr. Gershengorn has an active Indian law practice, with particular emphasis on Supreme Court and appellate litigation. He was counsel of record in Wagnon v. Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation, which he argued in October 2005. And he successfully argued before the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Carcieri v. Norton, a case challenging the authority of the United States to take land into trust for Tribes. He has filed amicus briefs supporting the Tribes and tribal interests at the Supreme Court, including Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma v. Leavitt; City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York; and Inyo County v. Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Bishop Community of the Bishop Colony. He also successfully opposed certiorari in South Dakota v. Cummings, a case involving the authority of state officials in hot pursuit to arrest a tribal member on the reservation for a misdemeanor committed off the reservation."


"
Before coming to Jenner & Block in 1997, Mr. Gershengorn served for two years in the U.S. Department of Justice, first as Special Assistant and Counsel to Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick, and then as Assistant to Attorney General Janet Reno. At the Justice Department, Mr. Gershengorn worked on a variety of civil and civil rights matters, and also coordinated the Department’s responses to the Judicial Conference of the United States, the American Bar Association, and other organizations on rules-related issues.

Mr. Gershengorn is the author of “Lingering Uncertainty,” National Law Journal (Aug. 3, 2005) (reviewing the Supreme Court’s First Amendment cases from the October 2004 Term); “Telemarketing Restrictions and the First Amendment,” Communications Lawyer (Summer 2002); “The Fall of the FCC’s Personal Attack and Political Editorial Rules,” Communications Lawyer (Spring 2001); and “Winship on Rough Waters: The Erosion of the Reasonable Doubt Standard,” 106 Harvard Law Review 1093 (1993). He is also the co-author (with Philip B. Heymann) of “Pursuing Justice Respecting the Law: The U.S. Experience with Extraterritorial Statutes,” Criminal Law Forum (Autumn 1991), and “A Comment on United States v. Alvarez Machain,” Criminal Law Forum (Spring 1993). He has also been a frequent contributor to the American Bar Association’s Preview of Supreme Court Cases.

Mr. Gershengorn received his A.B. magna cum laude in 1988 from Harvard College and his J.D. magna cum laude in 1993 from Harvard Law School, where he served as an editor of the Harvard Law Review. After law school, Mr. Gershengorn served as a law clerk first for Judge Amalya L. Kearse of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and then for Associate Justice John Paul Stevens of the United States Supreme Court."



But feel free to knee jerk away.

[populistdriven]

7. Thanks! I still trust him but trust and verify. I appreciate the balance. nt

[Uzybone]

8. Forgot to add the link I got his bio from

http://www.jenner.com/people/bio.asp?id=222


But why automatically oppose him because he once worked for the RIAA? Are they not a legitimate business? Do you know in what manner he worked for them?

[Sebastian Doyle]

13. "Are they not a legitimate business?" Not by my estimation.

They don't exist anywhere else on the planet, do they?

What does that tell you? They are one of many results of out of control predatory corporatism.

Yeah, BlacKKKwater and Halliburton are technically "legitimate" businesses too. But without illegitmate "rights" given to corporations, we wouldn't have to put up with them either.

[populistdriven]

16. Why have ANY lawyers that worked for the RIAA. They have submitted some truly abhorrent legislation

that was fought tooth and nail to defeat by folks like EFF.

[Uzybone]

19. do you know in what capacity he represented them?

[populistdriven]

21. please provide us your knowledge on the subject

like i stated above

[Uzybone]

23. you can't slither away with that shit

your the one with the knee jerk poutrage who doesn't even have the slightest clue what they are pissed about. All you've said is RIAA and lawyer. You oppose the guy, so educate us on why he is bad. What exactly did he do for the RIAA that makes him taboo?

I might end up agreeing with you.

[populistdriven]

26. I am calm and you are using the angry verbage

[Uzybone]

30. you should have said "I don't know"

would have saved us both some time.

Next time have a little bit of info to back up your claims. You may end up teaching others something they didn't know.

[populistdriven]

32. why you are so quick with the curse words

[TheWatcher]

24. And of course, CRICKETS.

The apologists are going to spin so hard today their heads will fly off.

[Uzybone]

27. that was quick

you called crickets 2 minutes after the question was asked. Dumbass.

[populistdriven]

28. more angry name calling

[Uzybone]

35. I'd tuck my tail and cry uncle too if I were you

have a good night.

[populistdriven]

39. Go cry yourself to sleep but don't drown in your ego

[TheWatcher]

72. Why, because of your devastatingly brilliant debate skills?

You throw feces at us and we're supposed to run in terror?

You have a serious thinking disorder.

[Uzybone]

77. don't stop now Watcher

you are getting lathered up.

[TheWatcher]

79. And you're boring me.

Answer the question.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Uzybone]

71. CRICKETS

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Uzybone]

75. keep going ....

you'll get there

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Uzybone]

81. no, that was my question

you cant steal my question and insult me with it too. Be original. You had been doing so well thus far. Don't lose steam now.

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Uzybone]

85. I don't ask questions when I know the answer

I asked because I want to know the answer.

The quality of your written jabs is slipping. I'm sure you've got something more cutting that an American Idol slam. Weak.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Uzybone]

87. That was not impressive Watcher

you built up such a frenzy tonight and to end it with a line from an old rocker is a disappointment. I expected better.


You are probably not even happy with that climax.

[TheWatcher]

98. Well, I probably could have done better if you weren't such a half-wit.

You see, in order for me to give you my best, you have to give your best.

I mean, what did you bring to the discussion other than childish insults and lame attempts at marginalizing Rod Stewart?

And you're right, who COULD be happy with that climax, considering the company I had it with.

You're the worst troll sex anyone could ever have.

Well, at least you had the Mod on your side, who deleted all of my fabulous, justified verbal spanking of you, but felt it was SO important to let your banter stand.

I guess I'm going to have to worry about showing my Papers to you guys soon.

And Mods, if you delete this comment instead of giving me a well-deserved DU'zy for the comment in bold, then it will be completely confirmed you're turning this place into a Gulag.

[TheWatcher]

84. Well, We're WAITING..............

[populistdriven]

97. lol!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

4. And this is bad because....

The RIAA hires incompentent, second rate lawyers?

[populistdriven]

5. ROFL!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. Seriously.

What the hell kind of phony poutrage is this?

[populistdriven]

9. um, in case you forgot we got FUCKING burned by Clinton on this. It at least must be monitored.

You should thank EFF and others for fighting for your rights. There is no outrage in the article.

However, $150,000 in damages per song does warrant outrage.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

11. And you should thank a lawyer for yours.

[populistdriven]

20. I generally do thank a lawyer. I admire the job. But you cant generalize.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

22. " But you cant generalize."

[populistdriven]

25. i believe that image is copyrighted

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

31. If I were you I'd be more worried about Glenn Beck suing.

You're stealing his unstable tea-bagger bit.

[populistdriven]

34. I bet you $1,000 dollars I worked harder on Obama's campaign, I have thank you letters to prove it.

don't start with me

Take the bet or stop being a Troll.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

36. I'll bet you a bajillion dollars I don't believe anything you say.

[populistdriven]

37. Take the bet.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

38. Take mine.

Take it hard.

[populistdriven]

40. Now you are talking with Angry Sexualized insults. Are you ex-military?

Sex and Violence
I thought we just ran them out of DC

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

41. I won three medals of honor fighting Tojo at Tippecanoe.

I have your thank you letters to prove it.

[populistdriven]

42. You have an admirable imagination

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

43. It's indefatigable.

But it still doesn't stretch far enough to believe you.

[populistdriven]

44. Take the bet.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

46. I take your bet.

And by that I mean call your bluff.

[populistdriven]

47. Calling my bluff is not taking my bet. I said I worked harder than you and had letters to prove it.

If you wish to question my support for Obama and my campaign CV then do it. But I won't go through the effort to compile it all and send it to you for nothing.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

48. Yes, but I don't believe you have letters to prove it.

Nor do I believe you worked hard.

[populistdriven]

49. I won't go through the effort to compile it all and send it to you for nothing.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

50. Then you owe me $1,000.

I'll have my lawyer contact yours.

[populistdriven]

52. You are obviously not serious stop joking about this.

I don't have a lawyer and I have no intention of getting one.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

54. How about you provide your former username.

I'm sure we can find all sorts of evidence for your support for Obama back in the archives.

:shrug:

[populistdriven]

57. sure that is easy

But whats it worth to you? I could care less about bragging rights. Make it worth my while. I could care less about impressing you since you have been so nasty.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

60. What's it worth to me? A thousand bucks.

Assuming you're a man of your word.

But there I am again with that whole imagination thing.

[populistdriven]

63. You want all this for nothing. You are not serious. PM me when you are.

All I have seen is insults. No reason why I should waste my time with you. Get a mod to mediate perhaps and I will deliver or you can ban me from these forums forever. If do deliver then whats in it for me?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

64. Is this how hard you worked on the campaign?

With all the backbone of a wet noodle?

[populistdriven]

66. Still with the Insults why is this so personal to you?

[Uzybone]

53. Trolls have all night to write up letters

I'm sure he will be able to produce something in short order.

A worthless unverifiable boast ("I worked harder than you") is the sure sign of BS artist. Mr Populist is very skilled.

[populistdriven]

55. I was going to send you a photograph of several letters but I need your email.

But why do you persist on being nasty? It brings into question your veracity.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

58. Why don't you post it on your very impressive blog?

That shouldn't be very much hard work for a hard worker like you.

[populistdriven]

61. Post what? My username?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

62. Either or.

[populistdriven]

65. username was bushmeat

[donheld]

93. Ok, you guys piss

and I'll measure.

[MilesColtrane]

10. Far from phony.

People loves them some free music.

[populistdriven]

14. ANY musician who doesn't know what the Analog Hole legislation is could give a crap what

happens to musicians in the future.

And if you do and don't care you are selling out like the old time unions sell out the younger members.

[MilesColtrane]

45. Whoa there Mr. Populist.

You'd be better served by directing your concerns toward that puppet of corporate interests, Rep. John Conyers.

[populistdriven]

51. Ok then thanks! You are right on target then. Remember this post was just to monitor and report.

The EFF needs our support to pressure our representatives.

[MilesColtrane]

80. John Conyers="puppet of corporate interests"

I didn't think I needed a sarcasm tag.

Live and learn.

[populistdriven]

95. yup he cosponsored the detestable Analog Hole bill because he is a buddy of BET

[JeffR]

68. Thanks. I was going to say something similar, but less succinct.

Anyone who has followed some of the ludicrous briefs the RIAA has sent it's counsel out on in recent years should realize that these guys are brilliant lawyers if only by dint of the fact that they can argue these cases with a straight face. The RIAA's legal costs must be astronomical even when they're not in litigation somewhere (which is probably rare).

They don't throw this money around on lightweight lawyers.

Beyond that, I'll reserve judgment until or unless something way more ominous than this crops up about him.

Maybe I'll go find a pirate thread.

[populistdriven]

96. I agree, no judgement has been, or should be made. But be informed.

[spanone]

12. after President Obama takes your guns, he's gonna take your digital downloads

[populistdriven]

18. If you think this is only about digital downloads you are woefully uninformed. take some time

and educate yourself

for starters http://www.eff.org/

[TheWatcher]

29. You're wasting your time.

Those who cheer blindly for the Football Team are going to follow it off a cliff.

It is hopeless right now.

But give them six months....

Or a year....

Or two years.....

Or three years....

Or eight years.....

[nolabels]

92. It's different this time.

With Bill Clinton it took the left a couple years to get hip to his tricks and how he was selling us out, this time it's only taking a couple months. I don't know what will happen but recognizing the problem early and devising ways to stop it is always a good sign.

[DissedByBush]

102. Don't you love the Internet?

It helps us get together and figure out how we are getting screwed faster than ever before.

Now we need to see whether we can use it to stop getting screwed.

[ColbertWatcher]

15. I'm starting to think Obama is practicing that old saying ...

... that says to "keeping you enemies closer".

[BlooInBloo]

17. You forgot...

Fuck Lars.

[Canuckistanian]

33. Didn't they first discover RIAA lawyers in the Olduvai Gorge?

Or was that in the caves of Brno, Czechoslovakia?

[depakid]

56. Clinton II the sequel

Great foreign policy- sell citizens out to corporate interests here at home.

Without a second thought.

[populistdriven]

59. Well the policy hasn't been submitted yet. Its too early to tell what it would look like isn't it?

[depakid]

69. No, the writing's been on the wall at DOJ for several weeks now

and the evidence from the internal decisions and the cases has kept on piling up.

Can't say I'm surprised- though we'll have to wait another 15 months or so to see how all of this plays out in terms of http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-loeb/hillary-and-the-politics-_b_73957.html">the Politics of Disappointment.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

76. I do hope the Clinton haters won't be hypocrites if that is true. I'm not counting on it.

:shrug:

[depakid]

83. Just callining it as it happened once before.. and nothing would please me better than to be wrong

If circumstances ever warranted a no-repeat of the "new" Democrat (as opposed to New Deal) philosophy, now would be the time.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

89. I wasn't calling you out at all....

The older I get the more progressive I become (I've even changed in the past year).

I was just calling out the people who lambasted Bill and Hillary yet give a pass to Barack.

I like all 3 of them. I'm excited too with the prospect of Barack being more to the left than Bill. I hope he is.

[madrchsod]

67. 5 really bad choices for privacy issues in the usa...

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/03/obama-sides-wit.html#previouspost

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/12/analysis-riaa-s.html#previouspost

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/facts/


oh well watch what you share on the internet.....big brother is watching

[onenote]

88. The horror! Obama DOJ being staffed with accomplished, experienced attorneys

If you liked those LIberty U lawyers, you're going to hate these Harvard magna cum laude, law review, federal law clerk top guns. If you liked a DOJ staffed by right wing leaning hacks you're going to hate it that lawyers like Gershegon have supported Democratic candidates and has actual experience at the DOJ.

[DatManFromNawlins]

103. Accomplished?

The RIAA lawyers have been getting their asses handed to them by law school students at 4th tier universities for eyars now.

[onenote]

90. BTW - the claim the Obama admin supports $150K per download penalty is BS

Here is a link to the brief that is cited as proof of this claim. http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/obamadoc.pdf

The issue on which the Obama administration opined was not whether a fine of $150,000 per music track would be justified in a particular case. Rather the issue was whether the provision in the Copyright Act that allows copyright owners to elect the option of seeking an award of statutory damages in an amount, to be decided by the judge, of not less than $200 and not more than $150,000, was constituional. The law has long provided for this form of remedy and there is no serious argument that can be made that its not within Congress' constitutional authority to do so.

By way of further explanation -- if you are the owner of a copyright (say you drew and published a cartoon) and someone took that work and reproduced and sold it without your permission -- you have a private right of action for infringment and damages under the Copyright Act. As an alternative to proving the precise amount of damages you suffered -- which may be difficult to quantify -- the law establishes, both as a form of remedial compensation and to deter infringement -- a statutory damages option. Where simple infringement is proven, the judge has the discretion, based on the facts, to award an amount between $750 and $30,000 as it determines is just. If the plaintiff proves that the infringement was done willfuly, the upper limit on allowable statutory damages increases to $150,000; if the defendant proves he/she was not aware and had no reason to believe his/her actions were infringing, the court may reduce the amount of statutory damages to as little as $200.

The issue brief by the administration was general in nature -- it related to the constitutionality of the damages provision in general, not as applied to a particular case or type of infringement. The administration took the utterly unsurprising position that its not unconstituional for congress to establish a range of statutory damages as an alternative to forcing copyright owners to prove actual damages. As for the amount, the current law allows judges to set those damages as low as $200 or as high as $150000, depending on the facts. The administration said nothing about whether a particular award of damages of a particular amount would be appropriate in any particular set of facts. It certainly said nothing about what the award of damages should or shouldn't be for illegally uploading a single music track or even a whole bunch of tracks. In fact, the brief points out that the plaintiff's case is premature because the plaintiff hasn't yet been found guilty of infringement or had any amount of statutory damages imposed on them.


Not to put too fine a point on it -- saying that the administration expressed support for a fine of $150K per music track is bullshit.

[Joe Fields]

91. The RIAA has the recording industry to blame for their hard times,

when they made the deal with i-tunes.

[DissedByBush]

99. That $8.6 million is really paying off

That's how much Obama got from the TV/Movies/Music industry this election.

The industry just bought itself an extra enforcement arm. Why blow money on abusive lawyers and illegal investigators when the DOJ can pursue alleged infringers for you at taxpayer expense?

[Marie26]

100. Yeah but

Moveon.org crowd donated over $10 million. Where's their return on their investment?

[DissedByBush]

101. What returns are you looking for?

He's done quite a bit already with alternative energy and SCHIP.

[Marie26]

104. Window dressing

Yeah, little changes here & there are nice. But when it comes to the big things, the corporations still rule.

[DissedByBush]

106. You speak the truth n/t