Well. Mr. Fisher and I continue our correspondence about the inaccuracies of his December 30th story, and his defense of them. This has been going on for a week now. Here is an excerpt from my latest email for those that are interested:
Dear Mr. Fisher:
Thank you for your reply.
I understand that you did not write "the Howell case was based on a mere transfer of legally obtained music from a CD to a computer." But that was the gist, that was the focus of the story, was it not? After all, your title reads "Download Uproar: Record Industry Goes After
Personal Use". Come on. Anyone that reads that story understands the title and the gist of the story.
In your last email you have written to me:
"What was news in this case was the novel statement by the industry lawyer on page 15 of the supplemental brief, at the top of the page, saying that the
mere possession of a copied piece of music was "unauthorized.""
The top of page 15 of the supplemental brief, in fact, all of page 15 of the supplemental brief, is about
dissemination, not personal storage. The header for that page, or, more accurately, the point the Court wants the plaintiff to address, reads:
"C. Defendant possessed unauthorized copies of Plaintiff’s copyrighted sound recordings on his computer and actually disseminated such unauthorized copies over the
KaZaA peer-to-peer network."
Thus, anything under that header is necessarily about
dissemination...that is what the court asked for. To take any sentence or part of a sentence out of that paragraph without addressing dissemination is out of context, and misleading.
I do not understand how you can keep your position after I've brought to your attention the inaccurate title:
"Download Uproar:
Record Industry Goes After Personal Use"
and the inaccurate sentence:
"In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is
illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD
to transfer that music into his computer."
And now your explanation is inaccurate: that page 15 of the brief is somehow
not about dissemination.
...
Mr. Fisher's position is untenable, and futile (I always win
). If he does not issue a correction by week's end, I will contact the editor. The title is misleading, the quotes are taken out of context, and the entire gist of the story is inaccurate. I am tiring of arguing the obvious. Either he folds, or I will make him fold. Blatant untruths, misquotes (out-of-context) and misleading stories cannot go unchecked when found.
