"He's ashamed of nothing that he's done. He has no need for attorney-client privilege. He has no need for secrecy."

Damon W. Root | April 8, 2009

That's Harvard law professor and lawyer Charles Nesson describing his very unorthodox legal defense of a Boston University student accused of illegally downloading music. Among other things, Nesson has posted emails on his website from fellow legal academics who reject his theories and has even posted an audio recording of his wife calling one of the law students assisting on the case a "schmuck." The Boston Globe has the details:

The suit filed by the Recording Industry Association of America has yet to go to trial, but Nesson's recent tactics have drawn criticism, even among the association's most outspoken foes. In the past few weeks, he has tape-recorded a telephone conference with a federal judge and opposing counsel, and then—after US District Judge Nancy Gertner of Boston told him to shut it off—posted the record ing on his blog and featured it in a take-home exam on evidence for his students....

Such moves might suggest that Nesson is trying to sabotage his own case, but the white-haired 70-year-old professor with a mischievous grin contended they merely reflect the transparency that is the hallmark of Tenenbaum's battle—indeed the transparency that Nesson says is the essence of the Internet.

"Our strategy in this case is one of openness," he said. "Joel committed no crime. He's ashamed of nothing that he's done. He has no need for attorney-client privilege. He has no need for secrecy. He wishes he could claim privacy, but that has been grievously violated [by the recording industry]. . . . It's our strategy to litigate this case open."

Read the whole thing here, including comments by copyright lawyer Ben Sheffner, who calls Nesson's approach "off the charts.... I can't imagine any lawyer on earth revealing that his own experts think that his case is seriously flawed."

Reason on copyright law and intellectual property here. 

Comments

Taktix®|4.8.09 @ 12:52PM|#

I see the point he's trying to make, but would one assume he should have used a better audio sample?

SpongePaul|4.8.09 @ 12:56PM|#

his point is correct, his methods TBD

JP|4.8.09 @ 1:06PM|#

"Billion Dollar Charlie" is eccentric, to say the least.

|4.8.09 @ 2:09PM|#

His tape recording and publishing of the conference call with the Judge borders on insanity.

He appears to be self -absorbed that nothing else matters.

Abdul|4.8.09 @ 2:12PM|#

copyright lawyer Ben Sheffner, who calls Nesson's approach "off the charts.... I can't imagine any lawyer on earth revealing that his own experts think that his case is seriously flawed."

That's where he's gotcha! You're thinking about mere earth lawyers! Nesson is an intergalactic lawyer.

|4.8.09 @ 3:00PM|#

I had Charlie Nesson for Criminal Law as a 1L. Good to see he hasn't changed a bit.

High Every Body|4.8.09 @ 3:42PM|#

Yea, but he is not a real lawyer, he is just a law teacher. Perhaps he taught Obama most of what he knows.

Don't we have a saying around here about those types?

ed|4.8.09 @ 6:20PM|#

The suit filed by the Recording Industry Association of America has yet to go to trial

"Trial"? What an old-fashioned concept!
We make judgements based upon the presentations of Nancy Grace and Keith Olbermann.
Guilty by opinion poll!
Next!