dslreports logo
 story category
Supreme Court Won't Hear Jamie Thomas Case
$222,000 For 24 Songs Will Be Her Final Punishment
Settling what has been an eight year saga at this point, the Supreme Court says they won't be hearing the infamous Jammie Thomas-Rasset case, meaning the $222,000 verdict levied against her for sharing twenty-four copyrighted songs (a punishment supported by the White House) will stand. Thomas-Rasset was told in 2005 she could settle for $5,000 or be sued, and chose the latter. The case has bounced around the courts for years, at one point her punishment getting as high as $1.92 million. Her case was only one of two such cases to ever go to court; Boston University student Joel Tenenbaum also lost his case against the RIAA and was ordered to pay $675,000 -- a decision also allowed to stand.
view:
topics flat nest 

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't? More court cases to collect?

celeritypc
For Lucky Best Wash, Use Mr. Sparkle
Premium Member
join:2004-05-15
Caldwell, NJ

celeritypc

Premium Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

said by FFH5:

Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't? More court cases to collect?

She files bankruptcy and the judgement gets tossed. Granted, she will have the bankruptcy follow her for 7 years but will recover fairly quickly from it.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

1 recommendation

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

Yea, hope the musical enjoyment was worth it. DOWNLOAD LEGALLY

DaSneaky1D
what's up
MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou

DaSneaky1D

MVM

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

This was in 2005.... the legal music download scene wasn't really well established, nor was the concept of "I really don't own the music I purchased on this CD" a generally accepted concept.

Not to drag this out, but the music industry has successfully changed public thought to believe it's better to lease monthly access to a wealth of music, store music files purchased online and have legal access to them as long as you remain a customer of "said" service (unless you knowingly download to back them up).

Boy, how times have changed...

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

Napster was shut down in 2001, and legal means of downloading like Itunes were released and widespread shortly after.

Wow, Im getting all these songs for free !!

Now was her opinion " The best things in life are free" , "if its Free it for Me", or was it " if its too good to be true, it probably is"

1700 downloaded songs illegally, give me a break

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

1700 songs should never equal $222k
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd

Premium Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

it should equal $1700 because a song is only worth that if based off iTunes.

DaSneaky1D
what's up
MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou

DaSneaky1D to ITALIAN926

MVM

to ITALIAN926
iTunes may have been available in 2001, but it wasn't until DRM free mp3 files were sold that things started to change. This is less about the woman in question, as it is the mindset change for everyone...

"At the 2009 Macworld Conference & Expo, it was announced that the iTunes Music Store would be DRM-free, with all songs DRM-free by April 2009."

Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY

Transmaster to ITALIAN926

Member

to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:

Napster was shut down in 2001, and legal means of downloading like Itunes were released and widespread shortly after. Wow, Im getting all these songs for free !! Now was her opinion " The best things in life are free" , "if its Free it for Me", or was it " if its too good to be true, it probably is" 1700 downloaded songs illegally, give me a break

This is all find and dandy and I do use iTunes and Amazon but what about a recording that has not been available for 50 or 60 years and because of the ridiculous copyright laws is still has a maintained copyright, and will have one for at least another 50 or 60 years and the copyright holder has no intention of ever publishing it but since is costs little or nothing to maintain can sit on it forever, and is not available anywhere to purchase not even on a place such as Discogs. This is the problem I have with this whole issue I always purchase what I listen to but what about something that is not available for purchase anywhere. I have been looking for a show put on by Kay Kyser at Ft Lewis, Washington in 1941 He was performing for the 115th Cavalry, Wyoming Army National Guard. It was recorded and I have never been able to find it. If I run into it on a bit-torrent site I will download it period, I am not holding my breath. They way I see it the copyright laws on music need to be reformed. I believe that a copyright holder should be obligated to publish what they hold in a meaningful release every so many years and if they fail do so the copyright is canceled and the rights are transferred to the National Archives. Where a person on demand can purchase this music. I resent a speculator sitting on a copyright who's "studio" is nothing more then a post office box.
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC

1 recommendation

axus to ITALIAN926

Member

to ITALIAN926
You're the kind of person who tells Rosa Parks "Hope sitting in the front seat was worth it!" after she goes to jail.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

1 recommendation

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

Yea well, Rosa Parks PAID HER FARE on that bus, this woman did not pay her FARE.

Xioden
Premium Member
join:2008-06-10
Monticello, NY

Xioden

Premium Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

Paid or not she broke the law all the same. I mean just think, that white person Rosa Parks didn't give her seat up for could have fallen on the way to the back of the bus causing long term injury and a loss of their way of life! I mean who cares how likely any of that is to happen, it's too hard to prove damages anyway, so $222,000 judgement in favor of the plaintiff against Rosa Parks too because, well... because!

toby
Troy Mcclure
join:2001-11-13
Seattle, WA

toby to ITALIAN926

Member

to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:

Yea well, Rosa Parks PAID HER FARE on that bus, this woman did not pay her FARE.

Have you ever watched tv clips on Youtube?

Most of those are illegal.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

Youtube removes any copyrighted material almost instantly when reported. Is there a legal difference between STREAMING, and DOWNLOADING? I would assume that streaming isnt categorized as copying, downloading/saving them certainly is.
This woman downloaded 1200 mp3's, and probably burned dozens of CDs

PapaMidnight
join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD

1 recommendation

PapaMidnight

Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

said by ITALIAN926:

Youtube removes any copyrighted material almost instantly when reported. Is there a legal difference between STREAMING, and DOWNLOADING? I would assume that streaming isnt categorized as copying, downloading/saving them certainly is.
This woman downloaded 1200 mp3's, and probably burned dozens of CDs

By streaming, you technically are downloading.
Also, she is being punished for 24 songs.
Let us also be clear on this: She is not being explicitly punished for downloading. She is being punished for implicitly "making available" 24 songs for an unidentifiable number of persons.

toby
Troy Mcclure
join:2001-11-13
Seattle, WA

toby to ITALIAN926

Member

to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:

Youtube removes any copyrighted material almost instantly when reported. Is there a legal difference between STREAMING, and DOWNLOADING? I would assume that streaming isnt categorized as copying, downloading/saving them certainly is.
This woman downloaded 1200 mp3's, and probably burned dozens of CDs

Streaming = downloading. How can it not be?

Youtube removes some material, not all.
silbaco
Premium Member
join:2009-08-03
USA

silbaco

Premium Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

Technically they are the same, legally they are not.
dra6o0n
join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON

dra6o0n to toby

Member

to toby
Technically isn't.
Streaming is a whole different segment than downloading.

The way you look at it, Streaming is a session, which you download, and upload data.

Youtube is a site that streams video to you, you don't literally download something to save and use it, it's temporary data that is used and erased after the user browse elsewhere.

tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Gulfport, MS

tc1uscg

Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

said by dra6o0n:

Technically isn't.
Streaming is a whole different segment than downloading.

The way you look at it, Streaming is a session, which you download, and upload data.

Youtube is a site that streams video to you, you don't literally download something to save and use it, it's temporary data that is used and erased after the user browse elsewhere.

However, streaming may be one thing, capturing that stream is another animal. What about all these apps that "allow" you to download videos of youtube? Or the apps that "rips" the music from the youtube video? We can also visit the apps that capture songs being streamed on the internet and stores them (with tags) on your PC. As long as Youtube plants "temp" files on your PC, "technically", your keeping part of said file on your PC till you clean up. Just sayin
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC

axus to ITALIAN926

Member

to ITALIAN926
Even worse, she allowed others to ride the bus FOR FREE, thus depriving the good Montgomery County bus service of paying fares, which may or may not have added up to $222,000 worth of damages.
40757180 (banned)
join:2009-11-01

40757180 (banned) to ITALIAN926

Member

to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:

Yea, hope the musical enjoyment was worth it. DOWNLOAD LEGALLY

Welcome to the 21th century. Why do that when people can just download from secure places and nothing happens to them.
tired_runner
Premium Member
join:2000-08-25
CT

tired_runner to celeritypc

Premium Member

to celeritypc
I don't think an administrative judgment can be dissolved into a chapter 7. More like this person will have a permanent wage garnishment for the rest of her fiscal life. And for 24 songs, that's fucked up.

Snakeoil
Ignore Button. The coward's feature.
Premium Member
join:2000-08-05
united state

Snakeoil to celeritypc

Premium Member

to celeritypc
said by celeritypc:

said by FFH5:

Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't? More court cases to collect?

She files bankruptcy and the judgement gets tossed. Granted, she will have the bankruptcy follow her for 7 years but will recover fairly quickly from it.

Bah, why even do that?
She can refuse to pay it, do her jail time for refusing a court order [I think she'd get jail time for refusing to pay].
But bottom line is this:
Thanks to the RIAA and the court system, we now have a new welfare recipient on our hands.
If she fails to make the welfare rolls, she could get a low income job, that just covers her bills. They [the courts/RIAA] can not take anything away from her that she needs to live on. Meaning if she needs 30k a year to survive, then that should be the income level she seeks.
I have a friend that got divorced, he quit his 100k a year job, and went to McD's. She had already taken all the savings and other items, left him with just the shirt on his back and child support payments. By working McD's he was able to dodge child support, because it would have been a hardship for him based on his current income level. So he got away not paying child support.
Note: Now that the kids are over 18, and the ex is in a study relationship, he left McD's and returned to making a better income.

So I think that would work in this case as well.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25

Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

First, I dont believe this as the court would use 3-5 years of previous income or potential income (if they are under employing themselves) to decide this. Any competent lawyer would certainly take this approach.

Second, your friend is an idiot for "doing" that to his children. Child support is there to help give them adequate housing by both parents and is based on % of income and time child spends with the parent and other expenses (day care and medical coverage). Your friend, by being vindictive to his EX only hurts his children and I see why the woman left him.
Papageno
join:2011-01-26
Portland, OR

Papageno to Snakeoil

Member

to Snakeoil
Your friend's a real prince. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face (or in this case, your ex). He could have made certain his kids were adequately provided for, made enough income to build up his retirement savings again etc. but no, it was more important to stick it to his ex.
nitzan
Premium Member
join:2008-02-27

1 recommendation

nitzan

Premium Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

said by Papageno:

Your friend's a real prince. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face (or in this case, your ex). He could have made certain his kids were adequately provided for, made enough income to build up his retirement savings again etc. but no, it was more important to stick it to his ex.

Why are you guys (or girls) assuming the kids suffered as a result of this? from what it sounds like the wife got quite a bit of savings so more than enough to take care of the kids for a few years. Having been through a nasty divorce myself I can sympathize - the courts are biased towards women and they literally get everything - in my case we were married 5 years with only me working while she went to school (when she didn't sit on her ass playing video games), yet in the divorce she got all the savings *I* worked for and left me with nothing. No kids, no logical reason why she should get a single cent, no justice.

RRedline
Rated R
Premium Member
join:2002-05-15
USA

2 recommendations

RRedline to Papageno

Premium Member

to Papageno
I wouldn't be so quick to assume that the children suffered in this case. The family court systems are so farked up in this country that it very often leaves the noncustodial parent (usually the man) unable to support him/herself financially, even though the other parent can choose to live off the other one's income alone (in addition to their new partner's income). The formulas and logic behind child support are a broken mess, and lawmakers are afraid to touch it out of fear that they will be seen as not "thinking about the children."

I have seen it myself many times. A man works full-time and easily supports his family. He gets divorced and loses custody of the kids and is forced to pay a ridiculous amount in child support. He can't even afford to live on his own and has to move in with his parents, while the ex lives comfortably on his child support payments in addition to her own income and her new boyfriend's income. Oh, and to top it all off, she gets to claim the children on her income tax return resulting in thousands of dollars in reduced income tax. If the formulas used to calculate child support ensure that both parents pay a fair share, then why doesn't the noncustodial parent get to claim children as dependents on his or her income tax return?

I could go on and on, but it just pisses me off thinking about it. I don't even have kids and have never gone through it, but family courts ruin people's lives everyday, including the children's in many cases.

tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Gulfport, MS

1 recommendation

tc1uscg

Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

For a minute, I thought you were talking about how men are treated in Michigan but it appears to be a nationwide issue. Everything you said is so true. There are men who are scumbags and don't deserve the title as father much less dad, but there many many more who try to do the right thing only to have it used against us when we go into court for a child support review or reduction. They don't care that the other kids are in college and their support/tuition is funded by dad and step-mom. They don't care that all medical is provided by dad. They don't care that dad has paid for both of their cars, insurance and up keep. And they don't care that while doing so, dad will go without or live in a cardboard box to ensure his kids don't have to go without. Mom on the other hand will play the pity card as much as she can and the courts will continue to play along.

Dont Matter
@charter.com

Dont Matter

Anon

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

Yea, Fellow Michigander here. Wayne County no less of course. Left an awesome career as a Semi-Automated Hydro-Electric Vehicle Maintenance Technician meaning a car wash btw lol for more money working for one of the oldest best known by name piano moving companies. Moving 1800s upright player pianos down and up hills into an unfinished home for too many living well by ripping others off I mean republicans lol. Next winter called back out during the divorce to take it back out since our owner gave out full lifetime money back repurchases to our Christian customers. was making at times almost 180.00 a week and one week we were swamped with deliveries purchasing used and having two stores the second not one delivery in 8 yrs sorta told me to burn it down long ago but so happy on Friday getting the biggest paycheck I'd ever received when the higher mgr asked me to come outside for a minute with him. The handed me my check. $75.00. FOTCUNT contacted my boss and basically scared him into giving them everything i made over 75.00 and I wasn't a deadbeat dad. in fact i rarely could see my son was shocked as hell last time I'd seen him we were out playing putt putt golf on his 13th bday all he wanted and at 17 his crack-whore egg-layer he called mom wouldn't let him use his car we bought and gave him to get to school and graduate since in Mich at least Wayne county the court continues taking my wages as long as hes enrolled in school up until he is 19 1/2 and he called us begging for help. she was dealing drugs even her mom was into it not saying I'm an angel but he never once received his bday Christmas or any gifts or money nothing since the email Addy's she was giving me i was sending them through were just ones she made up for herself he knew nothing of them. He thought I was the bad guy. Also I had no clue even who or what that 6'4+ 300lb+ dude was or why he just almost ripped my door outta the frame. The only one thing since she knew me and I never make or take a threat and always regardless keep my word but in this case she did what I told her and never told me who his father really is. Know one of two but not adding more problems on as he stayed with my parents for a yr while attending school. Dad got him a sweet Ford Explorer. Popo called him said pick it up at the impound. Boy let two friends use it to purchase couple lbs bud with it and they were only 16. We just sorta arrived and left with it they weren't interested in stopping us. The magic of a Smith n Wesson 500 lol. Dad looking around asked whats this battery doing in the back by the hatch. 6 Cell sealed. told him to go find the radio for me
he couldn't. so cracked the code and a 10K system had been installed in that truck. showed him the mega cable under the hood and secondary alternator even being 190 amps i believe. son showed up at my house in the truck asked him if he remembered my Smokey Joe grill said no forgot bring it next day or two. next day the SUV was in Dads driveway he was left a msg once dad did some looking around and making calls. He hasn't and knowing us as he and his mother do won't return to Mich ever. just to make it clear when learning she and her hubby ex hubby ex again were going up wayyy up into Canadia where Canadians live lol to the Indian resort they were before i learned of how this was ending oddly enough heading up on that what 401 or Death Alley while he was driving sorta lost his head when a 35 ft cabin cruiser somehow hmm and its trailer dc'd and damn chains broke too so sorta slid over the hood and down off the trunk back on the road. Sorta made a mess in the middle too tho. Well fuck it. I only have one rule and its the same for all of us here. Actually there are 3 but made em all the same cause sometimes only way to fix Stoopid is to go Boating!!! so DO NOT FUCK WITH ME OR MINE AND THAT INCLUDES MY FRIENDS. Thats simple I think. Brightest Blessings!!! Peace all .

tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Gulfport, MS

tc1uscg

Member

Re: Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't?

If you live in the area, what stops you from seeing him? Even if she has legal physical custody, you still have a say in his life and not sure about Wayne County but in Macomb, there are 16th circuit court parental time rules. If she's not letting you see your son, you don't need a lawyer, you need to take her to court. All that matters is, your son will see you trying to be a dad and how mother is trying to keep him apart from you. In the end, how you look in his eyes is all that should matter. You don't need to prove yourself to anyone else.
Crookshanks
join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

Crookshanks to Snakeoil

Member

to Snakeoil
said by Snakeoil:

She can refuse to pay it, do her jail time for refusing a court order [I think she'd get jail time for refusing to pay].

We don't have debtor's prisons in the United States. You don't go to jail for debts owed to a private corporation or individual, even if you disregard judgments. The only debts you go to jail for are child/spousal support and taxes, and that's only in the event that you refuse to make a good faith effort to repay them.

Civil judgments are barely worth the paper they're printed on. There are so many creative and legal ways to get around them that they're almost worthless. OJ Simpson hasn't paid a dime of the civil judgment levied against him. Monies parked in retirement accounts are completely exempt, as is your home in many states, your pension, many 'heirloom' possessions (i.e., your wedding wing can't be taken to satisfy a judgment), firearms up to a certain value, social security income, disability/unemployment income, etc, etc, etc.

•••••••••••••••
40757180 (banned)
join:2009-11-01

40757180 (banned) to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

Can she pay $222,000? And what if she can't? More court cases to collect?

Her first born will be taken as payment.
nitzan
Premium Member
join:2008-02-27

nitzan

Premium Member

Cruel and unusual punishment.

And here I thought the Supreme Court was there to uphold the constitution. Turns out that's not the case when it's the constitution vs giant evil corporations. No one should have to have their lives ruined because of sharing a few songs.

•••••••••••••••••••

Chaplain
So It Goes
Premium Member
join:2002-10-11
USA

1 recommendation

Chaplain

Premium Member

Ridiculous

The cost of the verdict is ridiculously high, and only an idiot would defend it as is. And no, I don't illegally download anything, so I'm not biased towards the defendant.

•••••••••
silbaco
Premium Member
join:2009-08-03
USA

silbaco

Premium Member

Jamie Thomas

Although I think the fine is ways too high, she had the option to pay significantly less. And she didn't take it. She chose to gamble, thinking she could beat them and she didn't. Welcome to the legal system. It was pretty foolish to not take the settlement.

•••

Duramax08
To The Moon
Premium Member
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX

Duramax08

Premium Member

Shes lucky

"Thomas-Rasset has maintained that one of her children was responsible for the illegal downloads from her computer. The RIAA said that Thomas-Rasset had been caught downloading more than 1,700 songs -- it brought legal action on 24 of them."

Damn thats alot of songs. She should of just listened to the radio
houghe9
join:2008-02-27
Lexington Park, MD

houghe9

Member

short sighted

not hearing the case is incredibly short sighted and only contributes to the idea that the social contract that each citizen has with the united states of america is irrelevant.
i am not talking about guilt or innocence just the given idea that we tell our children that the system we all agree to is fair and when we have been wronged we have a forum to redress grievances. I tell my children as us citizens we have rights and if we are mistreated or wronged we have a system with laws that protect our rights to say that the emperor has no clothes on.

the supreme court is the final determination and as citizens of the united states we agree to that.

the system has failed all of us with regard to this case, it does not matter where you stand and what your opinion is, this is bad for all of us. this issue effects everyone and not hearing it leaves a whole segment of the population with the idea that it doesnt matter what is fair. it does not matter what is right and wrong because if it is wrong they wont be heard.

if they would have just heard the case and decided i could dismiss my opinion and agree to follow the decision. not hearing it makes me believe in my opinion and even more because the idea that the little person is important and the little person does matter is gone.

should it be legal for anyone to just send out mass letters with the threat that they will sue and demand money? this is not the only group to do this. who is protecting the rights of the little guy? who and where do we go to get justice?

“I worry about you and me, Judge Wilkins. I swear to God I do, ’cause if this country gets ruined… it’ll be ruined by people like you and me. This is a territory of unimportant people; most folks around here can’t even write their name. You and me… we’re the important people. Trouble is, there’s not enough of us important people to go around – we’re spread thin, so sometimes, important things get ignored or don’t get said. Like… take care of the little feller; see to it that he don’t get ignored or cheated or insulted; make sure that his dignity does not get trampled on. Now you’re feelin’ bad right now, and by God, you ought to… seein’ as what just happened to a decent man. Myrl Redding did not fail the law…the law failed Myrl.” -john goodman the jack bull

great movie and an incredible representation of what is happening to the united states.
axiomatic
join:2006-08-23
Tomball, TX

axiomatic

Member

messages

Ahhh yes... the "let's make an example of" method of punishment. It's worked so well over the years it's a wonder anyone breaks the rules anymore. Wait... it doesn't work at all and all that really happen's is someones life gets ruined and lawyers pockets get lined with money.

This should have been a "don't do this again" with a $1000 fine and Mrs. Thomas-Rasset would have learned her lesson just the same.

No what do we do, we waste the courts time/money for many years now when just like others posted... Mrs. Thomas-Rasset will claim bankrupt and move on with her life likely never paying a dime of this and in 7 year be back to normal.

•••

Snakeoil
Ignore Button. The coward's feature.
Premium Member
join:2000-08-05
united state

Snakeoil

Premium Member

IMO, people need to stop buying music.

Stop supporting the RIAA, and stop buying music. Unless the artist states that they are not RIAA members.
Or buy second hand CDs from shops and rip then into MP3s for the devices you use.
Until the RIAA takes a hit to their wallet, they will continue their strong arm tactics.

Just like people that complain about a certain game company, but continue to buy it's games.
Things wont change, until you hit them in their wallet.

David
Premium Member
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL

David

Premium Member

Re: IMO, people need to stop buying music.

hell, do better than that. Get stationripper/streamripper and atube catcher.

Pretty much free software for free music shout cast streams send out. That's how I get mine, commercials and all. I strip the commercials off the song beginning or end and poof MP3 copy for me!

Anyone who knows about "Vevo" on youtube knows them very well. Simply copy the link into atube catcher, select the encoding you want and sit back, be amazed!
zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Victoria, BC

zod5000

Member

I think its pretty high.

How much is this person making? 30 or 40k a year? Minus taxes. You're probably looking 7-8 years of take home income to pay a fine like that. That's a long time. It's a huge sentence.

I think the sentence far outweighs the crime. Here in Canada they amended our copyright act last year and maximum fine for all offenses is $5000.

I think the punishment far outweighs the crime. Out of all the laws we have, drug dealing, murder, kidnapping, etc... how far up the ladder does piracy really go. In my own line of moral ethics I put it closer to shoplifting than I do anything that deserves a 7 year sentence.

I guess its tough for the government. Hollywood is a huge industry in the US and generates huge megawads of cash/taxes. You can understand why they want to protect it.

On the other hand you have crime which i consider to be a misdeamenour being treated like its involuntary manslaughter or something.
DanteX
join:2010-09-09

DanteX

Member

Re: I think its pretty high.

Which Is why i Stated making Hollywood prove they suffered Financial hardship would ease the strain these bogus cases take on the Judicial system and save the room and resources for something more important and serious.
NeoandGeo
join:2003-05-10
Harrison, TN

NeoandGeo

Member

.

Why do people keep feeding ITALIAN? He's a troll and laughing when people try and tackle his asinine arguments. Ignore him and focus on the legitimate arguments brought up.

MOWAA
join:2010-03-25
Fort Lauderdale, FL

MOWAA

Member

Laws... there meant to be changed

I can see being fined $1.00 per song tops but this is overkill.
File bankruptcy and get it tossed.

Now if terrorist would just start attacking the Recording and Film industry and taking out some of these big wigs, I might just sympatize with a few Death to the RIAA and Death to the MPAA chants.. hell I might even throw in a Death to America chant just for a court feeling a song is worth more than one dollar.

•••

josephf
join:2009-04-26

josephf

Member

Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Discharges Court Judgements

Chapter 7 bankruptcy WILL discharge her from any obligation to satisfy this court judgement. The only exceptions to discharging debt via Chapter 7 are Family Support obligations and fines owed to the government.

••••

IowaCowboy
Lost in the Supermarket
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA

IowaCowboy

Premium Member

She'll probably file bankruptcy

She's probably getting solicitations from bankruptcy attorneys. After I was rear ended a few years back, my mailbox started filling up with solicitations from personal injury attorneys wanting my business and I was not badly injured (just some momentary soreness that went away the next day).

Insurance companies don't consider whiplash to be a serious injury. I just let the insurance settle with the hospital and put it behind me until I discovered hidden damage to my pickup and the at-fault party's insurer refused to pay for the busted frame so I ended up paying $200 to get it welded out of my pocket.

Probitas
@teksavvy.com

Probitas

Anon

insane

If she had bought all those songs, the total amount she would have spent would never approach the punishment. At this point the courts should have said 'Look, at best she owes for the music, plus a fine. This isn't a case of insurance fraud by a company against the little guy, this is just someone downloading music, albeit illegally, which should be curtailed. That doesn't mean she should be paying court costs on top of that. Because all she'll do is declare bankruptcy and then you won't see the payment anyway.'

Dumb all around. Count on a court of law to levy justice out of proportion to the crime. You think she'd killed someone.

Tron015452
@cogentco.com

Tron015452

Anon

Cruel and unusual punshiment!?

If the songs are $2 each x 1700 = $3200 then a fine of 5 times the value of the damages = $19200

Might as well call it a shakedown by the SS or the KGB.

To "make an example" of someone is not justice, it is revenge and tyranny.