$2.4m for 24 songs

Remove this Banner Ad

bit_pattern

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
Feb 6, 2008
9,053
357
Mosman
AFL Club
Collingwood
What a farce :eek:

June 19, 2009 - 11:10AM
A US jury has ordered a 32-year-old woman to pay $US1.92 million ($A2.4 million) in damages for illegally downloading 24 songs in a high-profile digital piracy case.

Jammie Thomas-Rasset, a single mother of four from the US state of Minnesota, was found liable for using the Kazaa peer-to-peer file-sharing network to download the songs over the internet.

The jury took just under five hours to reach its verdict.

It ordered Thomas-Rasset to pay $US1.92 million dollars - or $US80,000 ($A100,000) per song - to six record companies: Capitol Records, Sony BMG Music, Arista Records, Interscope Records, Warner Bros. Records and UMG Recordings.

Thomas-Rasset had been convicted previously, in October 2007, and ordered to pay $US220,000 ($A275,000) in damages but the judge who presided over that trial threw out the verdict calling it "wholly disproportionate" and "oppressive".

The Recording Industry Association of America and major music labels have brought suit against thousands of people for illegally downloading and sharing music, with most agreeing to settlements of between $3000 and $5000.

Thomas-Rasset was the first among those being sued to refuse a settlement and instead took the case to court.

In December, the RIAA said it would stop suing people who download music illegally and focus instead on getting Internet Service Providers to take action.

The move away from litigation represented a major shift in strategy for the music industry group, which had filed lawsuits against some 35,000 people for online music piracy since 2003.

AFP

http://www.theage.com.au/technology/music-pirate-fined-24m-20090619-cn4u.html
 
Ok, she shouldn't have done it *cough cough* but c'mon- isn't that's an unfair suck of the old sausage! 24 songs for goodness sake- not like she has downloaded the whole music store.

On the other shoe you could argue too that she deserved it by the looks of it having previously refused to settle- was never going to win. Ofcourse the record companies were going to want to make an example of anyone taking it up to them.

Probably end up in jail unless she can get a large amount of public donations to help her make payment. Gota feel for her and the kids.....

That said, with the publicity behind her, some big wig will probably manage to get the fine down on appeal.

The law really is an ass sometimes when thugs get less than some minor Intellectual Property infringer.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

dunno how anyone can justify that fine. Make her pay for a couple of CDs but $2.4 million is farcical.
 
All a major scam from the money whores known as the major record labels. Seriously, music will be better off without them and the shit marketable 'pop' music. Gobbled up all the independent labels with talented musicians too.

Seriously, $80 grand for a song which would cost $1 is grand larceny of the highest order. Get them to pay for the music they downloaded, and maybe 5% on top of that. The law is an arse sometimes, someone who punches a guy in the face gets a slap on the wrist, maybe a $2 grand fine, but a person who innocuously downloads 24 songs gets an 80 grand fine. And it is questionable whether those transactions would of even existed in the first place.

The ludicrous intellectual property laws are Just an excuse to open another major label bank vault. Nothing more.

I long for the day which the music industry becomes unchained from the burden of todays major labels. Seriously, the sooner the Music industry becomes a freelance industry, the better.'


In summary: Greedy ****ers.

I bet a large sum that Placebo will come here and start rambling on trying to justify those laws again.
 
Simpletons on the jury?

Yeah, probably the stereotypical American rednecks who couldn't tell the difference between a pistol shooting and a woman downloading music.

Following the case,anyone could see in the 2nd trial she was doomed,it was just a matter of how much the jury would award the RIAA.She was guilty as sin,and lied and hid evidence.Still,onward and upward to the next court no doubt.

To be honest i don't think even the RIAA expect anyone to be hammered that hard over 24 songs,it's not about the money.They are making an example of her.
 
What a joke. I would be up for about $1B if they ever came after me. Absolute farce.
 
What a joke. I would be up for about $1B if they ever came after me. Absolute farce.

I think if they went after every soul who has downloaded or received a burnt disc in their lives, all the money in the world wouldn't be anywhere near enough to pay for the 'damages'.

I calculated that I could owe the record industry about $500 million.
 
Mp3's are advertising as far as I'm concerned, a band wants my money I'm happy to pay it if they play to me LIVE. Adopting that philosophy would effectively kill commercial music and sort the REAL musicians from the boardroom created cash cows that cant perform live to save themselves.

And I'm happy to pay and support local bands, hell I was a local band a few years ago. We'd give away our CD's back then too.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mp3's are advertising as far as I'm concerned, a band wants my money I'm happy to pay it if they play to me LIVE. Adopting that philosophy would effectively kill commercial music and sort the REAL musicians from the boardroom created cash cows that cant perform live to save themselves.

And I'm happy to pay and support local bands, hell I was a local band a few years ago. We'd give away our CD's back then too.

Fair enough but what about projects that can't really 'do' live.For example,one man BM type stuff - Lurker Of Chalice/Leviathan.It's such high quality music (art to me),but i'll never see him live unless he hires a heap of session musicians
 
The reason these verdict happen is that the judge gives the jury no guidance on quantum in damages. So they have the ridiculously over the top plaintiff suggestion and the denial by the defendant.

It worked OK in the smoking cases because the juries just smacked the smoking companies
 
good news.

more people will accept the $3000 to $5000 fines offered and not bother to fight it in court :thumbsu:

wish the woosies in australia went in as hard :thumbsu:

looking forward to a good decision against ISPs this year as well :thumbsu:
 
All a major scam from the money whores known as the major record labels. Seriously, music will be better off without them and the shit marketable 'pop' music. Gobbled up all the independent labels with talented musicians too.

Seriously, $80 grand for a song which would cost $1 is grand larceny of the highest order. Get them to pay for the music they downloaded, and maybe 5% on top of that. The law is an arse sometimes, someone who punches a guy in the face gets a slap on the wrist, maybe a $2 grand fine, but a person who innocuously downloads 24 songs gets an 80 grand fine. And it is questionable whether those transactions would of even existed in the first place.

The ludicrous intellectual property laws are Just an excuse to open another major label bank vault. Nothing more.

I long for the day which the music industry becomes unchained from the burden of todays major labels. Seriously, the sooner the Music industry becomes a freelance industry, the better.'


In summary: Greedy ****ers.

I bet a large sum that Placebo will come here and start rambling on trying to justify those laws again.

Wrong again. $2.4 Million dollars is an absurd amount. Make her pay for what she actually downloaded but 2.4 is just ridiculous.
 
good news.

more people will accept the $3000 to $5000 fines offered and not bother to fight it in court :thumbsu:

wish the woosies in australia went in as hard :thumbsu:

looking forward to a good decision against ISPs this year as well :thumbsu:

Well one of the stooges is still fighting... So, how are those shareprices aye?
 
Agree that is over the top.



But what is an appropriate penalty for theft? It isn't just repaying what you pinched.

I think Zarrix mentioned something like add 5 per cent on the top or something. The courts should be able to work out a reasonable penalty without going over the top.
 
What is it then?

piracylh1.jpg


You're welcome.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top