Date: Wed 4/11/2001 9:37 AM
From: Mark T. Weinberger ([email protected])
Subject: Judge Steams; Napster Cooked?
This Judge Patel is herself disgraceful making such high-strung, emotional comments in a public court of law. ("Judge Steams; Napster Cooked? ," Apr. 10, 2001) Characterizing the good-faith efforts of Napster as "disgraceful" shows her to be an intemperate jurist and if she continues in this vein, she should consider recusing herself from the case.
Her pro-RIAA bias is so clear both from the tone and tenor of her original "shut Napster down" remarks last summer – and now this outburst. She does not seem to be acting rationally but rather like a spoiled brat who didn't get her way. Luckily, the appeals court said Napster should/could continue to operate and thus, Judge Patel is stymied. If they order Napster shut down again, they'll trot right back to the appeals court which would likely re-state their opinion, that Patel was "overreaching", and we're back at square 1.
Patel needs to listen to her new expert and then realize that with perhaps some minor fine-tuning, that Napster is blocking much of what RIAA wanted within the constraints of their system architecture.
So to Patel I say, calm the heck down and take an aspirin. Napster is doing their best, if only the RIAA would do their best to assist Napster and themselves comply with the order by providing the exact file names the judge ordered, then the discussion would be moved along materially.