The record industry's case against Joel Tenenbaum began online, when he allegedly shared tracks on a peer-to-peer network. Now, Tenenbaum says the case should play itself out online,
with a Webcast of the trial proceedings.
"Net access will allow an intelligent public domain to shape itself by attending and engaging in a public trial of issues conflicting our
society," Tenenbaum's lawyer argued in a motion filed with the court. "Net access will allow an intelligent public domain to shape itself by attending and engaging a public trial prosecuted by a dying
CD industry against a defendant who did what comes naturally to digital kids."
The Recording Industry Association of America intends to indicate to Tenenbaum's lawyers that it will oppose the
motion. A spokesperson from the RIAA declined to comment for this article.
The RIAA filed suit against Tenenbaum last year, accusing the Massachusetts resident of having shared seven tracks on
Kazaa when he was a teenager. Harvard Law School Prof. Charles Nesson, founder of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society, took up Tenenbaum's case and, along with law students, has publicized key
issues in the case online by launching the Facebook group Joel Fights Back Against RIAA, a Twitter feed and a " blog.
The RIAA said earlier this month that it will no longer sue individuals suspected of file-sharing, but will instead work with
Internet service providers to sanction users outside of court. But cases that are already in the system, such as the lawsuit against Tenenbaum, are expected to continue.
Tenenbaum's latest
motion specifically asks Federal District Court Judge Nancy Gertner to "admit the Internet to the courtroom" by allowing the New York-based company Courtroom View Network to Webcast the proceedings.
The motion notes that court proceedings are typically open to the public.
Some judges have previously allowed TV cameras in the courtroom, but only a few courts have yet embraced Webcasts. But
the practice appears to be gaining acceptance. Tenenbaum's motion alleges that in the last year, at least five courts have allowed Webcasts of a portion of trial proceedings. In addition, some state
appellate courts allow Internet broadcasts of their proceedings, which typically involve lawyers making oral arguments, but don't include the testimony of witnesses.