Free Millions for a Song by André Vanasse

getting on his bad side. In these kinds of cases, you have to watch everything you do, even the way you laugh or cry ...” We’ll see who has the last laugh here.
    Justice Théberge appears wearing his robes, and the trial begins. The charges are read out, the names of all the parties and witnesses cited, and the alleged misappropriation described.
    Mr. Biron is in charge of this part of the proceeding, since we’re the plaintiffs. The defense will follow, to point out why it believes the charge is unfounded.
    Next Mr. Biron calls witnesses to the stand, most of whom were at our first unofficial show. Of course, they’re all convinced we’re the authors of our songs. They’re very clear on that point, but the defendant’s lawyer asks each of them in turn for tangible proof. “Did you see with your own eyes one of the members of the Nexxtep band write the song ‘Live in the Dark’?”
    As soon as they answer, “No,” it’s clear their testimony is worthless. “Just singing a song does not equate to writing it,” the defendant’s lawyer says over and over.
    Mr. Biron only called on the witnesses who saw the boy with the recorder. He tries to establish as fact that a child recorded our concert without our knowledge. No man’s fool, Mr. Bellehumeur asks for the boy’s name during his cross-examination.
    No one knows. Tom Paradis is enjoying this. He knows we haven’t managed to identify the kid. That’s why he smirks every time Mr. Biron questions a witness about the ghost and his recorder. Far from nervous, he’s jubilant! Just wait and see, Tom Paradis. In a few hours’ time, I’ll be the one sporting a victory smile.
    Then it’s my dad’s turn to testify. Mr. Biron urged him to keep his answers brief to avoid compromising our case. He confirms that I wrote the songs on his old computer. As for an exact date, he can’t …
    His vague answers are just what the other side wanted to hear. In the defence counsel’s mind, and maybe in the judge’s too, victory is theirs. There’s only one witness left to be heard from: Martin Simard. Mr. Biron asks to call him to the witness stand.
    The defense objects, maintaining a computer expert has no standing in the trial. In actual fact, Mr. Bellehumeur has no idea why the witness is being called and so is extremely wary.
    â€œYour Honor,” says Mr. Bellehumeur, “I fail to see what bearing an expert opinion has on this case. Especially considering the evidence we have filed, which pertains to copyright for a text not produced on a computer.”
    With all the authority of his position, Mr. Bellehumeur claims that the case is clear. “On October 24 th , my client, Tom Paradis, sent the Intellectual Property Rights Office form number 10 entitled, Application for Registration of a Copyright in a Work and an attached handwritten page with the song’s music and lyrics. I fail to understand, Your Honor, why we should have to listen to some expert drone on about computer-related issues.”
    The judge interrupts the defence lawyer. “Since the dispute centers around a text that was, according to the prosecution, entered into a computer prior to your copyright application, I deem it admissible to put a computer expert on the witness stand. I will rule on the relevance of his testimony after hearing him out.”
    Thrilled with the judge’s decision, Mr. Biron proceeds to call Mr. Martin Simard forward. He asks for his name, address, title, and role (computer programming specialist), then moves on to his line of questioning. “Mr. Simard, have you had an opportunity to inspect the computer belonging to Mr. Serge de Vertefeuille, Alexandre’s father?”
    â€œYes, I have,” Mr. Simard answers.
    â€œWhat type of computer is it?”
    â€œIt’s an older Macintosh computer. I have its serial number for filing.”
    Mr. Biron