Posted on 06/18/2009 6:29:59 PM PDT by dayglored
A federal jury Thursday found a 32-year-old Minnesota woman guilty of illegally downloading music from the Internet and fined her $80,000 each — a total of $1.9 million — for 24 songs.
Jammie Thomas-Rasset’s case was the first such copyright infringement case to go to trial in the United States, her attorney said.
Attorney Joe Sibley said that his client was shocked at fine, noting that the price tag on the songs she downloaded was 99 cents...
(Excerpt) Read more at cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com ...
Sure, she was probably guilty as hell of file sharing. But $80,000 per song???
I'm sure she plans to appeal... but still...
I am convinced all the folks in Minnesota are all brain damaged.
Tech pings? Maybe a Mac ping, what the hey....
Looks like the penalty for downloading a single song is worse than for armed robbery.
I wonder what they charge there for California stops.
I'm guessing that this case was filed before that happened.
They're still going after them. But yeah, this is actually a second attempt to get her -- this one's been going on for awhile, it's not new.
Or manslaughter...
Just you wait.... Hollywood and the record companies have been waiting for this moment. All hell's gonna break loose now.
Better turn off the Kazaa and BitTorrent settings....
And what will 0bama and the ‘Rats get for stealing trillions from us, our children, our grand children and great-grandchildren? Probably re-election in 2012.
They were probably just following the letter of the law of federal law which was written by the record lobby.
Boy am I glad I can buy through Amazon and ITunes...and if the music isn't available, I can get the used CDs on the cheap.
She should have said they were “undocumented downloads”.
No comment.I’m in the same biz.
Quess she should have paid .99 per song. She shouldn’t have her life ruined because of this. A little too nazi for me. It will probably be thrown out, but will cost her big bucks for attorneys.
The first one or two were undocumented. The rest were anchor babies.
The RIAA is trying to make up for years of stupidity (on their own part) for not recognizing a decade ago that the business model had to change.
Damn parasites, they sit between the creative artists and the eager listeners, reaping windfall after windfall for years with overpriced CDs, and they bitch when it falls apart.... they COULD have responded reasonably years ago, but now all they can do is squeeze anybody they catch.
Don'tcha know, their coke spoons are getting tarnished... they have to make their middleman cut...
Ignorant jurors.
This fine is ridiculous. I wrote a book 30 years ago; a local history which had ties to a major event in Amrerican history. I have been thinking (and have the research) to write an historical novel based on that research. When I read these stories I wonder what I would do if someone stole my intellectual propoerty (in fact, the only reason I haven’t written it is I don’t know HOW to protect my idea because I cannot write it my self!)
At a amateur level, so am I (as a lifelong musician who has self-produced CDs starting 12 years ago).
The problem is that the business model had to change, and the RIAA refused to do it. They could have made the new technologies work in their favor... but no, they have to do things the old way regardless...
Buggywhip makers.
Surprised she wasn't fined $7.8 trillion per song.
And it would be a blockbuster movie.
She is a mother of four, was using Kazaa, and reportedly had 1700 songs out for swapping. For simplicity, they only went after her for 24 of the 1700 songs. Otherwise, it could have been $136,000,000. A few more zeros, and she could retire the national debt. She turned down the usual plea bargain of $3K-$5K. Eeesh.
Anyone on this thread that is in the M biz understands this ruling.The non music biz people will not.
Two words: jury nullification
Hollywood luvs the porn peddlers, rapist, bank robbers etc - but they will fry you if you download their music for free...
I guess liberals know how to get tough when their money's on the table.
Well, her "crime" was the sharing, more than just the downloading. It's harsh as hell, because the RIAA didn't have to prove that anybody else even got a copy via her shares. They only had to prove "intent".
> It will probably be thrown out, but will cost her big bucks for attorneys.
I suspect it already has, though probably there are some pockets helping her out.
And judges instructions. Most jurors have no idea they can ignore all that. They just assume they have to follow what the judge tells them.
The last CD I bought was a Monty Python double in 1997. It was appropriately named "The Final Ripoff". I kid you not.
It sends a message
Well, maybe just a few less Christmas presents this year.
Yes, but how many people have even heard of the concept of jury nullification. Most people would assume they have to follow the letter of the law. They do not realize they are the final arbitrators and can ignore a bad law if they wish.
>>Most jurors have no idea they can ignore all that. They just assume they have to follow what the judge tells them.<<
Yeah, I was on jury duty once and told the rest of the jury that. Some of them did not believe me. In my job I deal with root causes. People don’t understand that a juror has a right to make his OWN decision. That is the whole point. He can be a racist sob that finds a black man guilty solely for his color. He has that right and if he is in unison with 11 of his kind, that black man is gonna have a bad day, inocent or not.
Ssshhh-hh-hh. The goobermint lawyers will hear ya....
> She turned down the usual plea bargain of $3K-$5K.
Yep. Somebody tried to prove a point. Unfortunately it was turned against them.
She was guilty. They should have used somebody who wasn't...
New title: Jury awards plaintiff blood from turnip.
Wow, that's... ummmm... GRAPHIC.
As a Python fan, I don't know how I missed that...
I try to tell people that every single person being sought by the RIAA is being sought for making songs available for upload. My shared folder has a few songs in it so that I get more search hits. But they are all originals. :)
And most of the songs that are available are probably college kids using university servers, etc. I love it!
I’m in the music biz - as a musician. But musicians are to the music biz what ford escorts are to the car rental biz.
A cold beer says that it will be a California jury.
Stuff like this will only help speed up the death throes of the mainstream music industry, which is fine by me.
It’s sort of a greatest hits compilation.
Too bad I wasn't on that jury...I would have been more than happy to introduce the concept.
“The RIAA is trying to make up for years of stupidity (on their own part) for not recognizing a decade ago that the business model had to change.”
Using your logic, we should all go down and steal the cars off the sales lots of GM and Chrysler, because their business models failed?
I have thought for decades that conservatism was about rule of law, sanctity of contract, and other archaic aspects of our society.
How old fashioned. I guess my society model is failed, outdated?
Amateur level maybe where you are at but at a pro level it’s a different ballgame.I’ve been in the biz for 30 years and the public has no idea what an average investment of a cd cost/record/album is.Each product can easily be in the millions.
hyphenated last name tells a lot...
My main gripe with this (other than the ridiculous scale of the fine) is that it means that "intent" alone is sufficient for conviction of file-sharing.
I find that a very dangerous "thought-crime" precedent.
Understand, I'm very sensitive to IP issues, I make my living on proprietary software and (to a small degree) making music. But this precedent is not good for freedom of thought and action.
Of course not.
I'm not justifying what she did, for cryin' out loud. She was wrong, and guilty.
But your analogy is flawed and illogical.
Taking real physical property like cars is stealing. If you don't understand the legal and ethical issues that differentiate intellectual property, file-sharing, and physical property, I can't help you, I don't have the time. Read up on it.
Me too. This is really sticking it to a person.
But what did you expect from a bunch of music thugs who are and have always been crooks. They have been stealing from the public from day one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.