In another brilliant PR stunt, the RIAA moved today in the ongoing case of Sony BMG vs. Tenenbaum to keep documents concerning revenue from becoming part of the public record. According to the RIAA, were these documents to reach the masses, they “would cause competitive harm to Plaintiffs and to the artist-owned companies.” Note the RIAA presented the brief on Friday, the day one which they were supposed to provide the court with the requested forms.
The idea of the argument to keep the records confidential is one that itself has merit. When files required for a case have the risk of harming someone if made public, the court has a responsibility to keep the sensitive material private. This makes sense. If the release of certain documents would immediately lead to several assassinations, the court would have an obligation to keep them from the public record. Though I can’t imagine that widespread knowledge of the inner workings of the RIAA would hurt anyone (save the RIAA).
What really interests me about these financial records is that they apparently contain data on transactions between the record labels and “certain artist-owned companies.” Has there ever been data released on how much of the money claimed by the RIAA in lawsuits goes to the artists? No, or at least not to my knowledge. If the RIAA had to present a file confirming that they did indeed just collect money to keep a Ferrari in the driveways of record company executives, public outrage would surely follow.
As nice as this would be for those of us who want the RIAA to go the way of the dodo, it is just speculation. We do know for certain, however, that the information contained in these files is “highly confidential, is not available to the public,” and most interestingly, “implicates business and legal competition issues.” Curious. Regardless of what these documents may contain, my opinion is that Charles Nesson should as the defense attorney be allowed to read the files and argue for their publicizing if he believes that is due course.
