Skip to comments.
Woman fined $1.9 million for illegal downloads
CNN.com ^
| 2009-06-18
| Elianne Friend
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-Rassets 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 ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bigmedia; copyright; download; judicialactivism; mp3; p2p; riaa; sony; tortreform
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-182 next last
No comment, I can't get words out, only curses.
Sure, she was probably guilty as hell of file sharing. But $80,000 per song???
I'm sure she plans to appeal... but still...
1
posted on
06/18/2009 6:29:59 PM PDT
by
dayglored
To: dayglored
I am convinced all the folks in Minnesota are all brain damaged.
2
posted on
06/18/2009 6:31:37 PM PDT
by
devane617
(Republicans first strategy should be taking over the MSM. Without it we are doomed.)
To: ShadowAce; Swordmaker
Tech pings? Maybe a Mac ping, what the hey....
3
posted on
06/18/2009 6:31:38 PM PDT
by
dayglored
(Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
To: dayglored
Looks like the penalty for downloading a single song is worse than for armed robbery.
I wonder what they charge there for California stops.
4
posted on
06/18/2009 6:33:54 PM PDT
by
RobRoy
(This too will pass. But it will hurt like a you know what.)
To: dayglored
I thought that the recording industry had stopped going after downloaders.
I'm guessing that this case was filed before that happened.
5
posted on
06/18/2009 6:34:07 PM PDT
by
SIDENET
("Join me or die. Can you do any less?" -Mr. Sparkle)
To: SIDENET
>
I thought that the recording industry had stopped going after downloaders. 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.
6
posted on
06/18/2009 6:35:15 PM PDT
by
dayglored
(Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
To: dayglored
Terrible. This is not justice. Justice would be to make her pay for the songs and sign an agreement not to do it again. Then if she violates that then assess fines. This is ridiculous.
7
posted on
06/18/2009 6:35:32 PM PDT
by
pray4liberty
(http://www.foundersvalues.com/)
To: RobRoy
Looks like the penalty for downloading a single song is worse than for armed robbery. Or manslaughter...
8
posted on
06/18/2009 6:36:01 PM PDT
by
coconutt2000
(NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
To: RobRoy
>
Looks like the penalty for downloading a single song is worse than for armed robbery. 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....
9
posted on
06/18/2009 6:36:42 PM PDT
by
dayglored
(Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
To: dayglored
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.
To: devane617
I am convinced all the folks in Minnesota are all brain damaged. They were probably just following the letter of the law of federal law which was written by the record lobby.
11
posted on
06/18/2009 6:36:52 PM PDT
by
Always Right
(Obama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)
To: SIDENET
I thought that the recording industry had stopped going after downloaders. 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.
12
posted on
06/18/2009 6:37:26 PM PDT
by
pray4liberty
(http://www.foundersvalues.com/)
To: dayglored
She should have said they were “undocumented downloads”.
13
posted on
06/18/2009 6:37:42 PM PDT
by
DuncanWaring
(The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
To: dayglored
No comment.I’m in the same biz.
14
posted on
06/18/2009 6:38:48 PM PDT
by
taxtruth
To: dayglored
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.
To: DuncanWaring
The first one or two were undocumented. The rest were anchor babies.
To: pray4liberty
>
Terrible. This is not justice.... This is ridiculous. 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...
17
posted on
06/18/2009 6:40:16 PM PDT
by
dayglored
(Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
To: dayglored
If she were black the false prophet Obama might pardon her. But since she's not she's screwed.
18
posted on
06/18/2009 6:41:02 PM PDT
by
South40
(Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. ~Hussein Obama, Cairo, Egypt, June 4, 2009)
To: Always Right
They were probably just following the letter of the law of federal law which was written by the record lobby. Ignorant jurors.
19
posted on
06/18/2009 6:41:17 PM PDT
by
Navy Patriot
(Prowd gaduate of a Calefornica publik skewl.)
To: dayglored
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!)
20
posted on
06/18/2009 6:42:09 PM PDT
by
CaptRon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-182 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson