Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Copyright Law Blogs -> Recording Industry vs The People
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Copyright Law
: Recording Industry vs The PeopleTenenbaum moves to compel Matthew Oppenheim to appear for deposition
By Ty Rogers and Ray Beckerman
In SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum, the defendant has moved to compel Matthew J. Oppenheim to appear for his deposition.
Mr. Oppenheim is the person who has been identified by the RIAA lawyers sometimes as the "client", sometimes as the "industry representative", and sometimes as the "client representative", and on at least one occasion as "the only person who had settlement authority" for the RIAA members. He claims to be associated with an entity called "The Oppenheim Group", and has acted as attorney of record for the record companies in several proceedings in Washington, D.C.
He sat at the counsel table in Capitol v. Thomas, where he was observed at one point, by the on-scene reporter from Ars Technica, to be reading "Recording Industry vs. The People" on his laptop during the trial.
He intervened on MediaSentry's behalf in the investigative proceedings which have been taking place in North Carolina, looking into MediaSentry's having engaged in investigation of North Carolina residents without an investigator's license.
Motion to Depose Matthew Oppenheim
Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion
Keywords: lawyer digital copyright law online internet law legal download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie independent label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs intellectual property portable music player
Full post as published by Recording Industry vs The People on January 20, 2009 (boomark / email).

Harvard Law Prof Calls RIAA's CD-R Inquiry 'Immense Triviality'
Deposition Podcasts: Advanced Techniques
DoD Inspector General Finds Religious Discrimination In Tenenbaum Case









