Posted on 10/04/2007 4:15:18 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
DULUTH, Minn. (AP) The recording industry won a key fight Thursday against illegal music downloading when a federal jury found a Minnesota woman shared copyrighted music online and levied $220,000 in damages against her.
Record companies have filed some 26,000 lawsuits since 2003 over file-sharing, which has hurt sales because it allows people to get music for free instead of paying for recordings in stores.
This was the first such case to go to trial. Many other defendants have settled by paying the companies a few thousand dollars.
The jury ordered Jammie Thomas, 30, to pay the six record companies that sued her $9,250 for each of 24 songs they focused on in the case. They had alleged she shared 1,702 songs in all.
More from the AP (later, updated story):
The companies accused Thomas, 30, of Brainerd, of offering the songs online through a Kazaa file-sharing account. She denied wrongdoing and testified that she didn’t have a Kazaa account.
During the three-day trial, the record companies presented evidence they said showed the copyrighted songs were offered by a Kazaa user under the name “tereastarr.”
Their witnesses, including officials from an Internet provider and a security firm, testified that the Internet address used by “tereastarr” belonged to Thomas.
This is insane!
GUILTY!
What do you want to bet they never collect a dime and she goes right back to file sharing?
Combined with a general break down of community morality, and the utter corruption of our schools, universities and mainstream media by secular, Marxist, leftist lies and deceptions, this is leading to the decline of this great nation.
I fully favor enforcing just laws.
Not all laws and not all court proceedings, are just.
220,000 people should donate her $1.00 and the rest of the population should cease to purchase any CDs whatsoever . Let the RIAA eat the damn discs .
just sayin...
If she’s going to pay that much in fines she might as well sell the downloads and make something while she’s at it.
I read that her lawyers rested without calling any witnesses. Sounds like a bad plan.
I guess everyone here who is on her side and against the RIAA thinks their favorite singers and songwriters should make music as a hobby and offer it free to anyone who hears it. Come to think of it, why should they charge for concerts? Why shouldn’t you get in free if you can figure out a way to tear a hole in the fence?
What do you get paid for? Can I have it free?
I wonder if the fact that she is an American Indian gives her “rights” that will allow her to avoid the penalties?
What sort of defense witnesses would you call?
The copyright cartel likes this precedent — it’s been getting a lot of bad ones lately. OTOH, those bad ones are where the RIAA went after people they knew were innocent.
She traded in copyrighted material and got caught. Too bad.
My question is: Will the artists see a dime of any money the RIAA gets from her? I doubt they will, since they already get none of the money that people pay when they settle.
They will continue to make money exactly the same way most of them make money today - by selling tickets to live performances. Most bands who have albums make little or nothing from them. The records companies make it all and the album serves as the band's billboard.
The internet and technology will make music CD's and record companies obsolete soon. But professional musicians will still be around and making money.
Dummmy question: Is the RIAA also going after people for Limewire downloads? My tech savvy teenagers are swearing to me that it isn't; I'm skeptical.
I doubt the RIAA will share the $385.42 per song they’re getting. She should pay for her crime, but not for more than the crime is worth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.