Minnesota woman found guilty of illegally sharing music online

[usregimechange]

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) -- Jammie Thomas makes $36,000 a year but says she's not looking for a handout to pay a $222,000 judgment after a jury decided she illegally shared music online and did it on purpose.

"I'm not going to ask for financial help," she told The Associated Press on Friday. But she added, "If it comes, I'm not going to turn it down, either."

Record labels have sued more than 26,000 people they accuse of downloading and offering music for sharing online in violation of copyright laws. Many of those people have settled by paying the companies a few thousand dollars.

Thomas was the first person to fight back all the way to a trial. Six major record companies accused Thomas of offering 1,702 songs on the Kazaa file-sharing network. At trial, they focused on 24 songs and jurors decided Thursday that Thomas willfully violated the copyright on all 24. They recommended she pay damages of $9,250 per song, or $222,000.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/05/news/filesharing_suit.ap/index.htm?section=money_latest

[papau]

1. She'll win appeal - judge was wrong to say they did not have to prove that someone took one of her

songs.

A bit like putting the car key on a hook in the kitchen - it makes it available to the underage kid, but until he drives with those keys there is nothing to discuss with the law.

[RC]

2. Will any musicians see any of this money?

Very doubtful. This is just more greed because they can.

[Thor_MN]

3. I don't think it's about the money. It deterrence they are seeking.

The fact that they are financially ruining her for life is just a convenient bonus for them.

[NoUsername]

4. She should appeal.

She was accused of offering 1,702 songs for download. At the trial, they focused on 24 songs and that was the basis the jury used for the award. Since these songs could have been downloaded for 99 cents each, she should have to pay a fine of $23.76.

I'm using the "Halliburton method" of determining the fine. Halliburton routinely fleeces us taxpayers out of hundreds of millions of dollars and when they get caught, it is referred to as an "accounting error." If we're lucky, they sometimes even have to pay back a portion of that "error." The same standards should apply to the defendant in this case. It's only fair.

Oh, and the RIAA can FOAD.