in the first half of this semester i had to take a required course on information law and policy. it was basically a quick overview of intellectual property and privacy issues. one of the most interesting aspects was reading actual supreme court opinions, especially mgm v. grokster, which was basically the napster case part II.
now comes the strange part: in the opinion justice souter mentions modest mouse! this is strange because i think of the band as an underground punk-meets-tom-waits trio, but i guess they actually had a hit at the time. you know your band has made it when you're enshrined in law. here's the exact quote from the opinion:
"Users seeking Top 40 songs, for example, or the latest release by Modest Mouse, are certain to be far more numerous than those seeking a free Decameron, and Grokster and StreamCast translated that demand into dollars."
it seems like mentioning modest mouse there is completely unnecessary--it has the ring of an inside joke. was souter somehow poking fun at scalia or thomas?
as an aside, the opinion also mentions wilco four times and dave matthews only once.