0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
America’s National Center for State Courts (NCSC) has an intriguing project in hand.It’s Justice Case Files, described as a series of illustrated novels designed to, “educate the public” about how US courts work, how judges make decisions and how courts are accountable to the law. Guess what the first one is all about?Called the Case of Internet Piracy, the first section,”tells the story of Megan, a college freshman charged with theft for downloading music ….”To say the ‘comic’ is simplified to the point of absurdity is a considerable understatement. It’s moronic.Apart from all the other omissions, it neglects to point out that despite the frequent use of the word ‘crime,’ no crime was committed.Megan may have broken Big 4 copyrights. But at absolute worst, it’s merely an infringement. And it’s a purely civil transgression, not a criminal matter.Nor does the NCSC mention although in the region of 40,000 people have received RIAA subpoenas, the Big 4 enforcement organization has only succeeded in bringing one case to court, and even that’s on the verge of being ruled a mistrial by the very judge who heard it in the first place.Far from being an “illustrated novel” to, “educate the public,” the NCSC comic book is yet another blatant example of how the corporate entertainment cartels are able to abuse official American agencies and use taxpayer money to raise purely commercial issues to the level of serious crime at the expense of far more important matters which as a direct result are left by the waysideIf you’d like to comment on the comic, or contact someone about it, try:dgager@ncsc.org757-259-1864
I emailed Montgomery a set of eight questions, among them »»»1 - Justice Case Files is described as a series of “illustrated novels” designed to, “educate the public” about how US courts work, how judges make decisions and how courts are accountable to the law. “Her [Megan’s] conviction sends a message that illegally downloading music is a crime [the word ‘crime’ is in bold italics for emphasis],” says the “county prosecutor”. What’s your basis for suggesting P2P file sharing by an individual (a) is a crime, and (b) would be prosecuted by any prosecutor, let alone a county prosecutor?2 - Whose decision was it to present this as though the government (at any level) would be involved in ‘prosecuting’ a file sharing case? What outside lawyers or non-lawyers were consulted? Number eight finished, “do you intend to withdraw ‘The Case of Internet Piracy’ from circulation; and/or, publish a correction; and/or apology? And if so, when?”Later, “I was hoping to have had a response the questions below, today, but in the meanwhile, I see the preview is still online,” I emailed Montgomery.“Do you plan to take it down until it’s corrected? If so, when?”An ongoing misinformation sue ‘em all campaign is being waged by Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG and their RIAA against their own customers in an attempt bring them to heel, and I believed the Big 4 enforcer had a hand in it. So among the questions I asked Montgomery was:“Was the RIAA, or anyone directly or indirectly associated with it, consulted at any time or in any manner about any aspect of this publication? If so, when, and who was it?”The comic is full of legal and factual errors and one would have thought in its own interests, if no one else’s, the agency would have quickly withdrawn it until corrections could be made. But as of 10:26 AM Pacific today, it was still online, complete with the mistakes..And I’m still waiting for Montgomery’s answers to my questions.
