has filed a most unusual “expert witness report” in the Tenenbaum case. This will surely raise some novel admissibility issues under Daubert/FRE 702 standards. And that, constant readers, is the understatement of the day. More surprises to come from the Nesson/HLS defense team, I have no doubt.
How many residential driveways are there in the USA? I have no idea, but I would estimate tens of millions. So it figures that someone whose driveway was videotaped by Google and put on the Internet for all to view (!?) on Google Street View would sue Google for invasion of privacy and trespass.
Copy of opinion here.
Link to the Boring’s home on Google Maps here.
My theory: these people actually crave attention for their property, and what better way to get it, than this? But then, I am married to a psychologist.
Oh, and of course, there’s this. No need to get paranoid, now …..
Massachusetts U.S. District Court Judge Nancy Gertner issued an order permitting the webcast of a scheduled in-court motion hearing in the RIAA/Tenenbaum copyright downloading case. The RIAA challenged the order, arguing that a federal rule prohibits the webcast. Here is yesterday’s audio of the First Circuit oral argument, with Harvard Law Prof. Charles Nesson arguing for Tenenbaum.… Read the full article
Great article by Steven Seidenberg in the February 2009 ABA Journal on the legal tensions between user-generated content sites (UGC, in the lingo) and the content owners under the “notice and take down” regime established by the DMCA.
Interesting fact from the article: On YouTube alone ten hours of video content are put online every minute of every day, more than 250,000 clips per day.
Cases and sites mentioned in the article: