Re: [Commons-Law] 1st Trial on file sharing- fines of 1.9 Million
Via: Pranesh Prakash
Lawrence, just wanted to add a few points:
1. There is excellent coverage of this case at Ars Technica
, whose reporter Nate Anderson was present during
the proceedings.
2. According to most observers, the quantum of the damages will work
against the RIAA because they will lose a) credibility (USD 80,000 per
song???) resulting in a backlash of opinion; b) will increase the
strength of the unconstitutionality arguments being championed by
Prof. Charles Nesson (in the Joel Tenenbaum case) (U.S. law allows
claims from $750 all the way up to $150,000).
3. There is a chance of this being settled by the RIAA and Thomas-Rasset
4. The quantum of damages allows Thomas-Rasset to plead bankruptcy
under an interpretation by a court that 'wilful' under bankruptcy law
is not the same as 'wilful' in copyright law -- that in bankruptcy law
'wilful and malicious' intent has to be shown, and that this would be
difficult to show (hence allowing her to declare bankruptcy).
5. There a torrent with 24 "representative" songs that the RIAA took
to court available on The Pirate Bay.
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 09:56, Lawrence Liang wrote:
> US mum is guilty of file-sharing
> By Jonathan Blake
> Newsbeat US reporter
>
> A woman has been ordered to pay $1.9 million (£1.2m) in the only
> file-sharing case to go to trial in the US.
>
> A jury in Minnesota ruled Jammie Thomas-Rasset, 32, had violated music
> copyright and must pay damages to the record industry.
>
> The mother of four from Minnesota was accused of illegally sharing 24 songs
> from artists including Sheryl Crow and Green Day.
>
> Outside the courtroom Thomas-Rasset said the damages were "ridiculous".
>
> It was the second time record companies had taken Thomas-Rasset to court.
> The first trial ended without a verdict.
>
> A spokeswoman for the Recording Industry Association of America said the
> companies were willing to settle out of court for a much smaller amount.
>
> "Since day one we have been willing to settle this case and we remain
> willing to do so," said Cara Duckworth from the RIAA.
>
> Previous cases
>
> Most people targeted by the music industry had settled for around £1,500
> each.
>
> It is not clear if Thomas-Rasset plans to appeal against the decision.
>
>
> This case was the only one of more than 30,000 similar lawsuits to make it
> to trial.
>
> Record companies accused Thomas-Rasset of uploading 1,700 songs to the Kazaa
> file-sharing site before it became a legal service.
>
> In court she described herself as a "huge music fan".
>
> Defence lawyers argued companies could not prove that she was sharing the
> songs, suggesting her children or ex-husband may have done it.
>
> Companies including Sony, BMI, Universal and Warner Music say they are now
> concentrating on working with internet service providers to crack down on
> the worst offenders of file-sharing.
>
> Online piracy has been blamed for a decline in music sales in recent years.
>
> Thomas-Rasset said she has no means of paying the fine: "There's no way
> they're ever going to get that.
>
> "I'm a mom, limited means, so I'm not going to worry about it now."
> _______________________________________________
> commons-law mailing list
> commons-law@sarai.net
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law
>
>
Lawrence, just wanted to add a few points:
1. There is excellent coverage of this case at Ars Technica
, whose reporter Nate Anderson was present during
the proceedings.
2. According to most observers, the quantum of the damages will work
against the RIAA because they will lose a) credibility (USD 80,000 per
song???) resulting in a backlash of opinion; b) will increase the
strength of the unconstitutionality arguments being championed by
Prof. Charles Nesson (in the Joel Tenenbaum case) (U.S. law allows
claims from $750 all the way up to $150,000).
3. There is a chance of this being settled by the RIAA and Thomas-Rasset
4. The quantum of damages allows Thomas-Rasset to plead bankruptcy
under an interpretation by a court that 'wilful' under bankruptcy law
is not the same as 'wilful' in copyright law -- that in bankruptcy law
'wilful and malicious' intent has to be shown, and that this would be
difficult to show (hence allowing her to declare bankruptcy).
5. There a torrent with 24 "representative" songs that the RIAA took
to court available on The Pirate Bay.
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 09:56, Lawrence Liang wrote:
> US mum is guilty of file-sharing
> By Jonathan Blake
> Newsbeat US reporter
>
> A woman has been ordered to pay $1.9 million (£1.2m) in the only
> file-sharing case to go to trial in the US.
>
> A jury in Minnesota ruled Jammie Thomas-Rasset, 32, had violated music
> copyright and must pay damages to the record industry.
>
> The mother of four from Minnesota was accused of illegally sharing 24 songs
> from artists including Sheryl Crow and Green Day.
>
> Outside the courtroom Thomas-Rasset said the damages were "ridiculous".
>
> It was the second time record companies had taken Thomas-Rasset to court.
> The first trial ended without a verdict.
>
> A spokeswoman for the Recording Industry Association of America said the
> companies were willing to settle out of court for a much smaller amount.
>
> "Since day one we have been willing to settle this case and we remain
> willing to do so," said Cara Duckworth from the RIAA.
>
> Previous cases
>
> Most people targeted by the music industry had settled for around £1,500
> each.
>
> It is not clear if Thomas-Rasset plans to appeal against the decision.
>
>
> This case was the only one of more than 30,000 similar lawsuits to make it
> to trial.
>
> Record companies accused Thomas-Rasset of uploading 1,700 songs to the Kazaa
> file-sharing site before it became a legal service.
>
> In court she described herself as a "huge music fan".
>
> Defence lawyers argued companies could not prove that she was sharing the
> songs, suggesting her children or ex-husband may have done it.
>
> Companies including Sony, BMI, Universal and Warner Music say they are now
> concentrating on working with internet service providers to crack down on
> the worst offenders of file-sharing.
>
> Online piracy has been blamed for a decline in music sales in recent years.
>
> Thomas-Rasset said she has no means of paying the fine: "There's no way
> they're ever going to get that.
>
> "I'm a mom, limited means, so I'm not going to worry about it now."
> _______________________________________________
> commons-law mailing list
> commons-law@sarai.net
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law
>
>
comments
No new comments allowed (anymore) on this post.