Woman ordered to pay $1.5 million for file-sharing 24 songs

[AidenCarby]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/w...ring-24-songs/

"We are again thankful to the jury for its service in this matter and that they recognized the severity of the defendant's misconduct," the RIAA said in a statement.

Fucking scumbags lol, multi billion dollar record labels.

[Zansho]

Aiden, she was giving away intellectual property (music) for free, property that she has no right to do so. Just because you buy the CD doesn't grant you distribution rights.

I do agree the penalty was a bit exorbitant, for 24 songs. Regardless, what she did is still wrong.

[AidenCarby]

Just sayin', fining a single mom of four, for 1.5m because of 24 songs is retarded. I could understand something like 5k, way to make an example of someone lol.

[Zansho]

I do agree with you there, for sure. But the offense could have been the number of people she distributed it to, how many times she's done it, not necessarily the 24 songs.

5k might still be a bit too much for a mother of 4, even so.

[AidenCarby]

5k is also reasonable, at least it is compare to a million and a half fucking dollars lol. It's probably just to make up for lack of sales, niggas mad etc.

[izembo]

most times to get a judgment like that she had to have been warned several times and kept doing it anyways thinking nothing would happen to her

[Cream Soda]

She needs 7 proxies

[Saga]

She needs 7 proxies

Or maybe a GUI interface created using Visual Basic, to see if she can track IP addresses.

[Gryffes]

$50 seems more appropriate.

[Cooleko]

I haven’t followed it too closely but this case is not what it appears to be just on the outside. this is the 3rd trial. first trial she lied about sharing, second one she lied some more but was caught and shown to be committing perjury. third trial was to reduce the amount she was ordered to pay. The entire argument from the RIAA was she refused to accept responsibility for her actions and needed to pay for it.

In germany, someone was ordered to pay something ridiculously low (~$100) for sharing music. I side with germany's way of thinking...

[Fhqwghads]

Did anyone even bother reading the article?

Jammie Thomas-Rasset, a single mother of four, was found liable by a jury on Wednesday of copyright infringement for using KaZaA peer-to-peer file-sharing network to download the songs over the Internet.

She was ordered to pay $62,500 for each of the 24 songs, a total of $1.5 million.

It doesn't say anywhere that she provided the songs for redistribution. Merely that she downloaded them. I don't agree with piracy either, but this is an example of corporations attacking the wrong fucking person, and smells of butthurt execs who can't evolve and adapt to new technology. The whole RIAA organization was made obsolete years ago, and hopefully after these last few high profile cases fizzle out (in favor of the defendants) they'll go the way of the dinosaur and accept their new positions as fossils and relics of an era we've left behind.

Now if it turns out she's an idiot and left her app open for distribution, and she kept on doing it after being told to stop repeatedly, well then she deserves a kick in the ass for being stupid.

[Uzor]

People still use KaZaA? Last time I used it I were, like, 13.

[Callisto]

I think it's a fair penalty for still using kazaa, she probably had just upgraded from limewire

[Headspace]

With shit like Pandora/Napster/Lastfm, who the fuck downloads music anymore?


(I know most people do, but I can't be bothered with it anymore)

[Uzor]

When did Kazaa stop getting developed anyway? Back in 2006? I mean, with all of the much better options available, why would ANYONE still use Kazaa? Hell, if she wanted those songs, she could get them the "legal" way and just grab them off of Youtube. Or do a quick google.

[Cooleko]

article is incorrect, she is being prosecuted for uploading. It was her first time as well (there were no other warnings, just a letter from RIAA saying pay up or go to court).

[Headspace]

This lawsuit has been going on for YEARS. She's not still using it.

[Cooleko]

This case began back in the day of the ancient tech, her trial is not just a recent development (it is the 3rd trial specifically for determining the damages to be paid to RIAA)

[Lucavi]

Yeah, for everyone lulzing because of her using "ancient" P2P programs, this case is pretty ancient itself.

[Ksandra]

Did anyone even bother reading the article?

Did you?

The RIAA and major music labels brought suit against thousands of people for illegally downloading and sharing music, with most agreeing to settlements of between $3,000 and $5,000.

Thomas-Rasset, however, has consistently refused to settle the case.

It's her own damn fault for not settling in the beginning.

Also, what Cookelo said about it.