US Government Doesn't See Anything Wrong with $1.92 Million File Sharing Verdict
Posted 08/17/09 at 09:12:52 AM by Paul Lilly
Comments
Print
Email
Jammie Thomas is running out of options. Found guilty in 2007 of copyright infringement and ordered to pay $220,000 for willfully making available 24 songs via peer-to-peer, she now owes a whopping $1.92 million following a retrial earlier this year. Surely the Department of Justice would step in and find the nearly $2 million fine unconstitutional, right?
Wrong. According to ArsTechnica, the huge of amount of damages (Thomas ended up owing $80,000 per song) were not intended just to apply to big corporations, but also to "deter the millions of users of new media from infringing copyrights." The only time the DOJ would have a problem with a fine is if it become "so severe and oppressive as to be wholly disproportional to the offense and obviously unreasonable," something for which a $1.92 million fine for sharing 24 songs doesn't qualify.
"We are pleased the Administration has filed a brief supporting our position," an RIAA spokesperson told ArsTechnica. "Its views are consistent with the views of every previous Administration that has weighed in on this issue."
So where does Thomas go from here? Probably bankruptcy court.
Image Credit: regent.edu
Well, she commited crime,
Submitted by abshandra on Tue, 11/17/2009 - 5:55am
Well, she commited crime, that totally wrong. But, the numbers are totally nuts. What the hell that company think? The argument that used by the company is totally insane. The worse is the government seems don't care and accepted it as something usual. That numbers is for huge company that do infringement, not for individual. Arrrggghhh.... Now, what she must do is to find out how to file for bankruptcy.
Who is haning on to what?
Submitted by tkid124 on Thu, 09/03/2009 - 7:49am
She was wrong and committed a crime. But she was sued in civil court, where the burden of proof is less than in criminal court. She was selected to be sued as an example, nothing really is wrong with that. She was sued for a ridiculous amount of money, something is wrong with that. If RIAA were to sue her for the costs of each album and lawyer’s fees, they would still be attacked, but not by me. Their amount was silly, and insulting, to themselves. Why would an industry sue their customers? Stupidity.
Submitted by Silencer on Fri, 08/21/2009 - 12:16am
Absolutely Outrageous.
Quoting "mesiah"...
"...if you get cought breaking the law, take your punishment."
You're nuts. The people she shared the songs with, DOWNLOADED THEM FROM HER. SHE DIDN'T PUT THE SONGS ON THEIR HARD DRIVES. And if they own copies of the songs, then no law was broken. Can RIAA prove that each downloader didn't own the songs that they downloaded from her? I doubt it.
If you think there's anything alright about this punisment, you're out of your mind. That's like chopping somebody's hand off for stealing a candy bar, which I guess you'd also support, "mesiah"... (Stick your hand out "mesiah", you've stolen something in your life... Or are you gonna tell me you haven't?)
OR WHAT IF... She'd taped the songs off the radio, then broadcast them with her own little pirate radio station, and then other people taped the songs off of her little pirate radio station? $1,920,000.00? $200,000? $20,000? All outrageous.
I stopped reading comments once I got to yours "mesiah", it pissed me off.
The woman is financially ruined. It's outrageous.
By the way, copies of digital media, are not exact bit-for-bit copies, of the originals. Does RIAA own all Zeros and Ones?
It's BS.
Google, and distribute, "Everyone's Guide to By-Passing Internet Censorship.pdf", to retaliate. It explains proxy softwares.
Greed
Submitted by gendoikari1 on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 7:44pm
Jammie Thomas shared 24 songs. At maximum iTunes pricing ($1.20 I think), Jammie Thomas would owe $28.80 in lost sales. At a per album price of $20 (as an example), those 24 songs would be $480.00 in lost sales. Even less if some were from the same album. The RIAA wants $2,000,000. Anything sticking out?
Also: Wikipedia says that the RIAA usually wants $750 per song. In this case, they wanted about $80,000 per song.
Submitted by mesiah on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 11:38pm
The suit wasn't based on her downloading the files, it was based on her giving them away. So you need to multiply your $480 by every single person who downloaded them, that would give you your lost sales. Also, she had far more than 24 songs being shared, but due to various reasons the riaa decided to focus on 24 songs in particular. That being said, I don't think the original amount of 200k was out of line. It may have been on the high side, but not rediculous. While I think that 2 mil is out of hand, at the same time I think its pretty funny. She didn't like the results the first time so she thought she would reroll the dice and ended up with a fine 10 times larger. I hate DRM and the RIAA just as much as the next guy, but I'm sorry, if you get cought breaking the law, take your punishment. She probably could have settled for less than $20k. Oh well, aparently I am the only heartless bastard here, but stealing is stealing.
Submitted by jcseely on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 7:15pm
Shame shame shame
Your average American is a complete
Submitted by Zazubovich on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 2:50pm
dumbass, and it is demonstrated over and over and over again in public and private forums. And we're the smartest in the world, supposedly.
This case is the industry lynching a poor woman to make an example of her. It's an atrocity so out of line with justice and decency that it should never have gone through. But this country has pay to play politics and Disney, among others, is so committed to holding its IP forever so they can milk it throughout all history that we all suffer the loss to creativity that absurd copyright laws cause.
Submitted by Trooper_One on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 11:23am
Don't pay it - not that she can anyways.
It really goes to show where priority lies in the American legal system.
Team of corporate lawyers vs a dinky single mom of kids.
Give 'em the middle finger Jammie, declare bankrupt and live with your relatives.
"so severe and oppressive
Submitted by nekollx on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 8:57am
"so severe and oppressive as to be wholly disproportional to the offense and obviously unreasonable,"
So.....Bankrupsy isnt considered wholly disproportional?
------------------------------
Coming soon to Lulu.com --Tokusatsu Heroes--
Five teenagers, one alien ghost, a robot, and the fate of the world.
Submitted by mattman059 on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 8:41am
ATTICA ATTICA ATTICA
Submitted by gendoikari1 on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 8:30am
The American legal system deserves a boot to the head. Well, at least with the $2,000,000 that Jammie Thomas can't pay, the staunch defenders of the record industry (like Lars "I downloaded my own album off the Internet" Ulrich) can afford their solid gold private space shuttles instead of solid silver.
Submitted by DrX69 on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 8:10am
Goverment bought and paid for brought to you by the RIAA/MPAA.
Submitted by Muerte on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 7:18am
Well, its about time to stop buying this type of media.
I don't mind that they find the guy guily or that they even fine him. But that sum is totally outrageous.
Anyone remember the dumbass lady who got millions for dumping hot coffe in her lap? Well this is the same thing in reverse.
I haven't bought a song on cd or download since this stuff started cropping up. Must be 10 years now. I find its not that hard.
Submitted by SuperiorBeing on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 11:09am
The hot coffee that spilled on her lap was kept at a high enough temperature (higher than almost all other coffe sellers, at 190 °F ) that it gave her third degree burns within seconds, requiring massive reconstructive surgery. They also settled out of court for less than $600,000, which is a large sum, but not "millions".
(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants)
Submitted by AmTGMan on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 2:29pm
There are a couple facts about the case, that you didn't post...
*I'm not going to bother posting the whole article here and break the comments section, so I'll just post the link...*
http://www.stellaawards.com/stella.html
Submitted by robotsneedhugs2 on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 6:56am
Congratulations, America, you're a dumbass!
"Eh, fuck you, buddy!"
Submitted by I Jedi on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 9:29am
"Eh, fuck you, buddy!"
Submitted by gendoikari1 on Mon, 08/17/2009 - 10:23am
Your average American is not a dumbass. The DOJ, the Recording Industry/Motion Picture Assholes of America and their crack team of ninja lawyers are. Also, soulless.
Must Read Articles
Feature
Review
Feature
Feature
Feature
Most Popular Articles
This Month's Issue
FEATURE How to Get FREE Programs, Services, Software & MoreFEATURE Digital Photo Printer RoundupHOW TOBuild a 3D CameraFEATUREDIY Arcade PCWHITE PAPERHow TRIM Works
Technology News
Computer Cooling Fans
Computer Cases
PC Game Controllers
PC Games
Computer Hardware
Headphones
MP3 Players
Stream Video
Computer Mouse
Monitors
Motherboards
NAS Storage
Networking
Laptop Computers
DVD Burner
Digital Cameras
Portable Storage
Computer Accessories
Smartphone
Antivirus Software
Sound Cards
Speakers
Computer Systems
Thumb Drives
Video Cameras
Video Card Reviews
Water Cooling
Gadgets
- Keyboards
© 2009 Future US, Inc. All Rights Reserved.