

Tilting at Internet Barrier, a Stalwart Is Upended - prpon
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/11/us/11download.html?_r=1&hp

======
michael_dorfman
Fascinating article-- too bad the headline is so opaque.

I remember quite a few conversations a few days ago about the outrageousness
of the dollar amount of the judgment; it's worth remembering that Tanenbaum
had plenty of options to settle for a much more modest penalty, but insisted
upon going to court, only to admit to downloading (which he had previously
denied in depositions), on the slim hope of a "fair use" defense, which even
people like Lessig had said was not really viable.

In other words: what were they thinking?

