If you ask me, I think that the jury are a bunch of idiots. Or they hate native people.
She probably (>50%) stole the songs, which is weird since she also bought a lot of CDs. It just goes to show that the RIAA is suing their own customers.
I know that if you infringe on copyrights there must be penalties, but holy shit! I mean, I don't think that they need to be going after normal people.
I am surprised that nobody posted this yet. I figured there'd be a 2 page discussion on it by now.
gideongallery would whine about how this is a gross violation of her privacy and how she was the victim. And then Jim Gunn would make fun of time shifting. And Paul Markham would say how we need strong copyright laws. And then Robbie would make fun of gideongallery's terrible sentence structure.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/200...jammie-thomas/
Quote:
A federal jury on Thursday found Jammie Thomas-Rasset liable in the nation?s only Recording Industry Association of America file-sharing case to go to trial, dinging her $1.92 million for infringing 24 songs.
Thomas-Rasset (then just Jammie Thomas) went to trial two years ago, and was ordered to pay $222,000 by a different jury for the same songs. The judge in the first case declared a mistrial. Thomas-Rasset opted for a new trial instead of settling like the 30,000-plus others the RIAA has sued or threatened to sue for copyright infringement.
Thomas-Rasset, fined $80,000 a track, told our sister publication, Ars Technica, she wouldn?t pay.
|