RIAA Wins $1.5M Judgment Against File-Sharer

November 5, 2010 -

The Recording Industry Association of America has won a major victory over defendant Jammie Thomas-Rasset, who lost her retrial. You may know Rasset as the woman who was ordered to pay a ridiculous amount of money for downloading MP3's. She has been ordered to pay $1.5 million, or $62,500 fine per shared song, for 24 songs she shared via Kazaa. This week an appeals court reaffirmed the judgment that the RIAA was awarded back in 2006 by a Minneapolis jury.

Thomas-Rasset’s legal team has already announced that they will file a new appeal. The RIAA says that it will not give the money to the artists whose rights were infringed, instead using the money for its anti-piracy campaigns. Interesting.

Source: TorrentFreak

Posted in

Comments

Re: RIAA Wins $1.5M Judgment Against File-Sharer

"The RIAA says that it will not give the money to the artists whose rights were infringed, instead using the money for its anti-piracy campaigns. Interesting."

The flesh of the dead, eaten by the zombies, will not be digested to help the zombies survive, as they are already dead and thus have no digestive systems, but some of the remnants of the dead being eaten will themselves become zombies in order to devour more of the living.

Re: RIAA Wins $1.5M Judgment Against File-Sharer

  The RIAA: finding ways to legally cheat artists out of their money since 1952

Re: RIAA Wins $1.5M Judgment Against File-Sharer

The RIAA says that it will not give the money to the artists whose rights were infringed, instead using the money for its anti-piracy campaigns.

But isn't this suit on the behalf of the artists who were so egregiously wronged by the file sharing? What about their restitution from this dangerous, damaging sharing of their works? How will they pay their bills?

Re: RIAA Wins $1.5M Judgment Against File-Sharer

Like they're going to get any money.

Ever heard the phrase you can't squeeze blood out of a turnip?

Re: RIAA Wins $1.5M Judgment Against File-Sharer

Yet another whose life and probably the lives of her children and grandchildren being ruined for good.

This is past ridiculous.

Re: RIAA Wins $1.5M Judgment Against File-Sharer

The RIAA says that it will not give the money to the artists whose rights were infringed, instead using the money for its anti-piracy campaigns.

Much as I dislike piracy, this is one of the many reasons why I don't like the RIAA either, and I'm certain I'm not the only one who feels this way. They really need to re-think their methods.

Re: RIAA Wins $1.5M Judgment Against File-Sharer

The RIAA said they won't do trails like this again, where they send letters asking for "settlements" or else they will go to court. But they will finish what they started. Kind of sad for Jammie Thomas-Rasset, who most likely will not end up paying anything near $1.5 million, but be bankrupted all the same.

Plus this court case is ridiculous to me, $62,500 per song (24 total)feels way overboard, and I suspect that the judge would have thrown out this jury rulling if the appeal wasn't filed yet.

Re: RIAA Wins $1.5M Judgment Against File-Sharer

A judge already drastically reduced the amount after the first trial, but then a mistrial was declared and they started over.  It'll be reduced again on appeal.

I'm not a big fan of Thomas-Rasset, but I'm glad she's hanging in there.  I'd really like to see the courts establish fair limits on damages like in BMW v Gore...

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Is King right? Should all games adopt the free-to-play model?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MaskedPixelanteNumber 3: Night Dive was brought to the attention of the public by a massive game recovery, and yet most of their released catalogue consists of games that other people did the hard work of getting re-released.04/17/2014 - 8:46pm
MaskedPixelanteNumber 2: If Humongous Entertainment wanted their stuff on Steam, why didn't they talk to their parent company, which does have a number of games published on Steam?04/17/2014 - 8:45pm
MaskedPixelanteNumber 1: When Night Dive spent the better part of a year teasing the return of true classics, having their big content dump be edutainment is kind of a kick in the stomach.04/17/2014 - 8:44pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://www.giantbomb.com/articles/jeff-gerstmann-heads-to-new-york-takes-questions/1100-4900/ He talks about the future games press and the games industry. It is worth your time even though it is a bit long, and stay for the QA. There are some good QA04/17/2014 - 5:28pm
IanCErm so they shouldn't sell edutainment at all? Why?04/17/2014 - 4:42pm
MaskedPixelanteNot that linkable, go onto Steam and there's stuff like Pajama Sam on the front-page, courtesy of Night Dive.04/17/2014 - 4:13pm
Andrew EisenOkay, again, please, please, PLEASE get in a habit of linking to whatever you're talking about.04/17/2014 - 4:05pm
MaskedPixelanteAnother round of Night Dive teasing and promising turns out to be stupid edutainment games. Thanks for wasting all our time, guys. See you never.04/17/2014 - 3:44pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the consequences were not only foreseeable, but very likely. anyone who understood supply demand curvs knew that was going to happen. SF has been a econ/trade hub for the last hundred years.04/17/2014 - 2:45pm
Andrew EisenMixedPixelante - Would you like to expand on that?04/17/2014 - 2:43pm
MaskedPixelanteWell, I am officially done with Night Dive Studios. Unless they can bring something worthwhile back, I'm never buying another game from them.04/17/2014 - 2:29pm
PHX Corphttp://www.msnbc.com/ronan-farrow/watch/video-games-continue-to-break-the-mold-229561923638 Ronan Farrow Daily on Video games breaking the mold04/17/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoAh yes, because by building something nice they were just asking for people to come push them out. Consequences are protested all the time when other people are implementing them.04/17/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew Wilsonok than they should not protest when the consequences of that choice occur.04/17/2014 - 1:06pm
NeenekoIf people want tall buildings, plenty of other cities with them. Part of freedom and markets is communities deciding what they do and do not want built in their collective space.04/17/2014 - 12:55pm
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician