CHUD.com Community › Forums › MUSIC › Music › RIAA Trial ends - not good for fans
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RIAA Trial ends - not good for fans

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 
http://leisureblogs.chicagotribune.c...fan-liabl.html

Quote:
A jury in Duluth, Minn., found Thursday that a single mother of two children was liable for infringing copyright on 24 major-label recordings and awarded the record-industry $220,000 in damages.

The woman, Jammie Thomas, was the first accused infringer to take the Recording Industry Association of America to trial. The association has sued more than 20,000 consumers since 2003, warning them they could face fines of up to $150,000 per song for downloading copyrighted music off the Internet without paying for it. The industry blames such file-sharing for a precipitous sales decline in recent years.
Engadget had the following commentary:

Quote:
...the RIAA plaintiffs weren't required to show that Thomas had a file-sharing program installed on her machine or that she was even the person using the Kazaa account in question.
The case is always subject to appeal. I guess this means if you're one of the 6,000 or so the RIAA sues (out of the over 9million downloaders) every year, you should not try to fight the man.
post #2 of 13
It seems like the simple solution to this is that if you use something like Kazaa, don't share your files.
post #3 of 13
Or don't use Kazaa. It's like force-feeding your hard drive with feces.
post #4 of 13
It's not hard to see how this trial was going to end up. Yeah, it sucks but I don't think this result is any indication on how future trials may end up. I read some of the defense's arguments and they didn't seem that strong to me.

EDIT: Also, I know the case stems from something a few years back, but who the fuck uses Kazaa anymore? I thought everyone knew that program is riddled with spyware, viruses, and entertainment company spies?
post #5 of 13
Thread Starter 
I know this has been talked about at length, but I'm still wondering why they don't have to prove SHE was the one sharing the files? Especially with wi-fi and the number of people who don't password protect their networks, I can't imagine this isn't a major point that the RIAA should have to prove.
post #6 of 13
I think we need a Clarence Darrow to turn one of these into a modern Monkey Trial -- don't deny that the songs were downloaded, but argue how ridiculous RIAA and the amounts of money being asked for are. Get the RIAA on the stand and roast them.
post #7 of 13
It's a nice thought, but of course...Darrow lost. I'm also not sure this issue is important enough to the media that a good examination would create the P.R. backlash necessary to effect the change we want.
post #8 of 13
Some good details on what went down.

http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-979...?tag=nefd.blgs

Basically Thomas was an idiot, and probably didn't have a very good representative either.
post #9 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson
don't deny that the songs were downloaded, but argue how ridiculous RIAA and the amounts of money being asked for are.
The jury could have tried to nullify, which does occasionally work outside the confines of Law and Order.
post #10 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by billylove
Basically Darrow was an idiot, and probably didn't have a very good representative either.

???
post #11 of 13
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveB
???
second.
post #12 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveB
???
Sorry, fixed it. Brain scatter happened.
post #13 of 13
More news. A couple of Jurors wanted to swing the Axe of Maximum Punishment.
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=9231
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
CHUD.com Community › Forums › MUSIC › Music › RIAA Trial ends - not good for fans