Rep. Lofgren: RIAA Lawsuits "Extortion"

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., today joined those who describe as extortion the lawsuits the Recording Industry Association of America has filed against students for file-sharing.
The lawmaker from Silicon Valley (pictured) was talking about the so-called PRO-IP Act, an intellectual property enforcement measure passed by the House Judiciary Committee today, when she raised the issue.
She said the RIAA has "made a business out of extorting money from the students."
That's because, to most people facing the lawsuits, "it makes sense to lose a few thousand dollars as compared to hiring a counsel to defend yourself," she added.
Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., whose district includes Hollywood, couldn't let that dig at his entertainment industry friends slide, although responded in a roundabout way.
He said he did not plan on arguing with Lofgren about her characterization but wanted to make sure that everyone knew that his decision "does not mean, at least for this particular member, [that] we accept the notion that they are extortion."
Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich, the chairman of the committee, seemed confused.
“Right. Whatever that means,” he said.

Another SCOTUS Justice Has His Say

There's been plenty of talk recently of Supreme Court Justices getting out and about, whether it be Justice Clarence Thomas promoting his book or Justice Antonin Scalia ... promoting his book.
Now Thurgood Marshall is taking his turn.
The late justice doesn't have a new book out, obviously, but he is the subject of a one-man play by George Stevens Jr. featuring acclaimed actor Laurence Fisburne.
Thurgood, the play, is on Broadway from next week until July, according to Broadway.com.
Stevens appears to have something of a Marshall fixation.
He previously won an Emmy for Separate But Equal, a 1991 TV miniseries, starring Sidney Poitier as Marshall.
Fishburne spoke to the Wall Street Journal about his new role in today's paper (scroll down to second segment).
Perhaps he'll appeal if the reviews are negative.

State Secrets Bill Makes Progress

Earlier today the Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation that would scale back the state secrets privilege.
The privilege is a favorite of the Bush administration, which has invoked it in various cases, including challenges to its wiretapping and extraordinary rendition programs.
Known as the State Secrets Protection Act, the bill sets up a set of procedures for federal courts to follow when handling claims of privilege.
Judges are required to look at the evidence the government claims is privileged and not simply rely on affadavits supplied by the government.
The legislation also prevents judges from dismissing cases before the discovery process is complete.
"It's long past time for Congress to address the state secrets privilege," said main sponsor Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. (pictured). "Congress needs to ensure ... that the courts are adjudicating the privilege properly and not just giving the executive a free pass."
The committee vote was also welcomed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which represents the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the government's wiretapping program.
One of the organization's attorneys, Kurt Opsahl, said he hoped Congress will rein in what he described as the Bush administration's "abuse of the state secret privilege."
A House bill has not yet progressed beyond the judiciary committee.

Do Associates Feel Pressure To Give Political Donations To Candidates Supported By Senior Partners?

In today's Daily Journal (subscribers only, unfortunately), I have a story chronicling California-based lawyer contributions to the two Democratic presidential candidates.
There are several key fundraisers for both Obama and Clinton at law firms there, including one of each at Palo Alto-based Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati.
John Roos, the firm's chief executive, is Obama's California finance committee co-chairman, while partner Steven M. Schatz is a national co-chair of Lawyers For Hillary.
What I was wondering while I was writing the story is how much pressure associates feel to contribute to campaigns supported by their bosses (not necessarily at Wilson Sonsini, but anywhere).
Obviously, all the firms claim that it's up to individual lawyers to make the decision, but I would imagine that other considerations might play into this.
Feel free to comment below.

Movement On Judicial Nominations

A dispute between Republicans and Democrats that dates back to the Clinton administration over who gets to be a judge on the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has finally been resolved.
The White House has nominated Helene N. White (pictured), a judge on the Michigan Court of Appeals, and withdrawn the nomination of Stephen Joseph Murphy III for that position.
He now has to settle for a place on the U.S. district court.
White was first nominated by President Clinton in 1997 but was blocked by Republicans.
In retaliation, the two Democratic senators for Michigan, Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow, blocked a series of Bush nominees to the appellate court.
As part of the deal announced Tuesday, Levin and Stabenow have withdrawn their opposition for another 6th Circuit nominee, Raymond M. Kethledge.
White, incidentally, is married to Levin's cousin, Charles Levin, who himself served as a judge in Michigan.
Democrats are no doubt hoping the deal will help ratchet down the drumbeat of criticism from Senate Republicans over the low number of judges confirmed so far this year.
In a related development, Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., revealed Tuesday that they have reached a tentative agreement that the Senate will hold confirmation votes on three pending circuit court nominees before Memorial Day.

Sen. Specter and Chief Judge Michel On The Same Page Over Patent Reform

It's perhaps no surprise that Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and Paul Michel, the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, share similar views on patent reform.
Both have been especially critical of proposed changes to the way damages are calculated.
They go way back.
Michel was an Assistant District Attorney in Philadelphia when Specter was the District Attorney in the late 1960’s.
He later served as Specter’s chief of staff in the Senate before being nominated to the bench in 1988.
The two again seemed to be joined at the hip this week, as I report in today's Daily Journal (suscribers only).
On Wednesday Specter revealed that he is withdrawing his support for the Patent Reform Act over the damages issue.
Then on Thursday, Michel, speaking at the American Bar Association's annual Intellectual Property Law Conference, also stuck the boot into the legislation.
Michel effectively told Congress to stay out of the damages issue.
If there is a problem, the courts will address it, he said.
"Congress ought to wait and see if ultimately the adjustments are good enough,” Michel added. “I would not say that Congress should never act on courthouse problems, but it could wait.”
It's now looking increasingly unlikely that the Patent Reform Act will pass the Senate without major changes.

U.S. Chamber Questions San Francisco Arbitration Lawsuit

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups appear to be suspicious about the motives behind a lawsuit filed by the San Francisco City Attorney against a private arbitration company.
As I report in the Daily Journal today (subscribers only), The lawsuit comes at a time when Congress is considering legislation - the Arbitration Fairness Act - that would ban pre-dispute mandatory arbitration agreements like the ones defendant National Arbitration Forum Inc. oversees.
What riles Lisa Rickard, president of the Chamber's Institute for Legal Reform, is how much the San Francisco lawsuit mirrors a report last year by consumer group Public Citizen.
The institute recently held a press conference attacking the report's findings.
"It's clear the San Francisco city attorney cut and pasted the trial lawyer-backed Public Citizen study, with all of its misleading information, directly into his lawsuit," Rickard told the Daily Journal.
In response, spokesmen for both Public Citizen and the San Francisco City Attorney's Office say there was no coordination, although the lawyers who filed suit did make use of the report.
For more on the lawsuit, see this Wall Street Journal story from earlier this week.

Poor Quality of Legal Representation In Death Penalty Cases Gets An Airing In Senate

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., held a little-heralded hearing on the quality of representation in capital cases earlier today.
In his opening statement, he described the standard of lawyering as "uneven at best."
Feingold (pictured), opposes the death penalty, but he noted that "as long as we have a death penalty, we owe it to those who are charged with capital crimes ... to make sure they have good lawyers who have the resources they need to mount an effective defense."
Among the witnesses was Michael S. Greco, a former president of the American Bar Association and a partner at Kilpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates Ellis.
He reported that an ABA study focusing on eight states found that each one "has grave problems that call into question its fairness and whether justice is being done."
The biggest problem, he added, "is the quality and availability of competent legal representation."
Feingold's solution would be to ban the death penalty altogether.
But his Death Penalty Abolition Act has so far failed to attract any support from fellow senators.

Specter Issues Another Judicial Confirmation Warning

The ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter, R-Pa., has ratcheted up his complaint that Democrats are obstructing judicial nominations.
Having already raised the issue earlier this year, Specter (pictured) opened up a new front this week by threatening that Republicans could effectively shut down the Senate in retaliation.
Only six circuit court nominees have been confirmed since January 2007, meaning that democrats will be hard-pressed to get anywhere near the 15 that Republicans confirmed in the last two years of President Clinton's final term.
"There is consideration being given to a variety of responses to this kind of conduct by the majority, and we all know any one senator can tie up this body unilaterally," Specter warned today.
He has at least one enthusiastic cheerleader in the form of the Wall Street Journal's editorial page.
"Democrats figure they'll retake the White House in November, and they don't mind leaving the courts short-handed for another year or two as they stall for liberal nominees," sniffed an editorial in today's paper .

IP Enforcement Joke Of The Day

Those jokers over at Public Knowledge, the digital rights public interest group, had their own bit of April Fool's Day fun earlier today.
They issued a press release slamming a piece of fictional legislation that would, among other things, set up a Department of Intellectual Property Security and extend copyright protections.
As the group's president, Gigi Sohn, noted in a statement that perhaps gave the game away: "This bill is a tragedy wrapped in a travesty. It is also a travesty wrapped in a tragedy."
But Public Knowledge wasn't just having a laugh, apparently.
As Sherwin Siy, an attorney with the group (pictured), explains in a follow-up post on his blog, "a lot of the provisions we included in the fake bill were modeled after real proposals made either by legislators, content industry lobbyist, or other policymakers."