Court Awards RIAA $1.9 million for 24 pirated songs

[wootpr0n]

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/

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.

[voa]

That is a lot of money, that is some huge bad competition.

[sortie]

They offered to settle out of court for $3500 and she refused.

Fuck her.

She stole, other people go to jail for that.

[fris]

you sure do stick up for these pirates a lot

[woj]

Wasn't that for sharing, uploading of songs?

[MRock]

would someone please pirate my songs and let me know where to send the letter from my lawyer ... oh wait, my material has been pirated ... where is my fucking money?

[gideongallery]

Originally Posted by wootpr0n

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/

it was posted in the middle of one of my other threads.
1. they went after for 24 songs she did no buy (leaving her alone for the 1000s that she did buy) so there is no timeshfting/backup etc fair use right to talk about
2. it kazza so she was giving away a complete working copy of the file (grokster case applies)

she is only knocking down bogus precedents (make available)

she still could get off on the next appeal because the judges direct went to far.(again)

The entire evidence against her is an extrapolated number of violations based on an Authorized transaction (the music industry rep downloaded from her folder)

it iffy (no fair use arguement) but win or lose she should be able to knock down that bogus precedent as well.

[GatorB]

Originally Posted by wootpr0n

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/

and if you could get $80,000 from every idiot that stole your movies and uploaded them on a tube you'd be all for that wouldn't you hypocrite?

[OldJeff]

So she needs to pay 2 million for stealing $24 worth of music, yet the NFL shithead ended a persons life through gross negligence, and will spend 30 days in jail.

The sense of justice in this country is seriously misguided.

[sortie]

Originally Posted by OldJeff

So she needs to pay 2 million for stealing $24 worth of music, yet the NFL shithead ended a persons life through gross negligence, and will spend 30 days in jail.

The sense of justice in this country is seriously misguided.

He pled and settled; the dumb bitch didn't.


Plus the guy killed was drunk also and ran out in front of the car and it was actually
his fault.