RIAA Defended Inconceivable File-Sharing Court RulingAdded: Sunday, February 27th, 2011
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Ridiculous Criminal Trials
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, 2010, www.extrattorrent.com
RIAA keeps defending the $1.5 million Thomas court decision as the only way to address the girl’s “disrespect for musicians and the law”. However, it still doesn’t acknowledge that the fine is still so incredibly high that it only proves the Recording Industry Association of America is very far from reality.
Over three years ago Jammie Thomas became the first individual ever to be convicted for unauthorized file-sharing in the United States. However, the case may well last for another ten years as it makes its way up to the Supreme Court.
From the very beginning, the RIAA couldn’t prove that the girl was actually engaged in unauthorized distribution of the 24 copyrighted music tracks. Although the outfit only managed to prove that it was possible for her to do so, a jury still found the defendant responsible for willful copyright violation and ruled Thomas should pay $220,000 in damages.
After the first appeal, the amount has rocketed up to an overwhelming $1.92 million. Later, the judge Michael J. Davis decreased the fine back to $54,000, but that wasn’t for long. Three months ago a jury reversed the latest ruling and applied the fine of $1.5 million.
When Judge Davis reduced the $1.92 million fine, he pointed out that statutory damages must still relate to actual damages, but the rest seem to forget about this detail. Even the Recording Industry Association of America itself admitted that the lawsuit and the fines are only meant to warn other file-sharers that their activity can end up badly.
Meanwhile, there’s another problem with the Thomas’s case: the current copyright legislation is intended to redress a copyright holder’s actual damages plus additional profits of the infringer. Since the girl was a noncommercial infringer, damages should have only reflected the harm she caused rather than served a message for others. But the RIAA spokeswoman Cara Duckworth keeps defending the court ruling as necessary to address Thomas’s “disrespect for content creators and the legal system”. However, although the RIAA accused Thomas of sharing copyrighted tracks with millions of anonymous strangers, the only confirmed individual she really shared a file with was the anti-P2P representative authorized to collect the evidence.
February 27th,2011Posted by:
Sunday, February 27th, 2011
|the system is so bullcrap if they can go up and down with the ruling as a stupid joke in the first place ,just shows how there really is not justice in the first place and that the old saying innocent till PROVEN guilty eh!|
|When will they learn, that you can't sue on the grounds of an outdated business model. The "Online Market Place" would destroy these old business models!! If they embraced the technology, they would make more money?? Try before you buy, like any reputable business! And have consumer laws in place for content that is below par.|
|When is comes down to it its all about money.Come on $1.5 million for 25 tracks!Thats just wrong any way you look at it.||
Most Popular Stories