RIAA wins its first jury case

CB Droege 5 Oct, 2007 at 1:08pm ET Article published in Tech

The first person to choose to go to trial with the RIAA, instead of settling out of court, has lost her case.

Jammie Thomas, a 30 year-old homemaker, who still claims that she doesn’t even have a Kazza account, has just been ordered by a jury to pay $220,000 in damages to the RIAA for theft and redistribution of 24 songs.

Since the result came in, Thomas has been inundated with requests from other copyright lawyers who wish to help her repeal this decision.

Comments

1. 
   5 Oct 2007 ~ 1:36pm mas0n This is just sad. $220,000/24 songs = $9,166.67 per song
   
   If iTunes has taught us nothing else it is that the average song is worth ~$1
   
   I'm guessing she did NOT upload each song 9100 times and did not financially benefit from the sharing of the 24 songs. What have we come to...
2. 
   5 Oct 2007 ~ 1:46pm GHoosdum Really? I had no idea...
3. 
   5 Oct 2007 ~ 2:24pm CB

   GHoosdum wrote:

   Really? I had no idea...

   
   I don't look at the shorties when I'm thinking of posting a new story, so sue me.
4. 
   5 Oct 2007 ~ 2:37pm GHoosdum Why would I sue you for something innocuous? I'm not the RIAA.
5. 
   5 Oct 2007 ~ 2:52pm primesuspect Careful, if he sues you and you take it to trial, you could owe him $13,263 per plagiarized shorty....
6. 
   5 Oct 2007 ~ 3:01pm shwaip

   mas0n wrote:

   This is just sad. $220,000/24 songs = $9,166.67 per song
   
   If iTunes has taught us nothing else it is that the average song is worth ~$1
   
   I'm guessing she did NOT upload each song 9100 times and did not financially benefit from the sharing of the 24 songs. What have we come to...

   
   go steal something, and when you get caught, offer to just pay what it's worth. see how that goes over.
7. 
   5 Oct 2007 ~ 3:15pm mas0n

   shwaip wrote:

   go steal something, and when you get caught, offer to just pay what it's worth. see how that goes over.

   
   If I stole something and got caught I would go to jail/prison and not get screwed in a civil lawsuit for 9,250 times more money than the items stolen are worth.
   
   The reason she is being sued and not going to jail is because copyright infringement is NOT theft.
8. 
   5 Oct 2007 ~ 3:17pm GHoosdum Oh, and according to the defendant, never stealing songs over the internet is not theift either.
9. 
   5 Oct 2007 ~ 8:01pm yagga Well, a fellow minnesotan tried... I'll need to look into how it went a little more...
   
   ...I just have to wonder, how in the world is this debt going to be paid??? If someone sued me for even $30,000 total I would laugh in their face... bank account + car + umm... college credits and my pinky toes won't be worth that much...
10. 
    6 Oct 2007 ~ 10:36pm Qeldroma It's not the songs or even necessarily the fine, but the cost of doing the trial as well. If you file a lawsuit, you also sign up for a percentage of arbitration with your counsel.
    
    What the RIAA had set, I have no idea- but if I read it right the award could have been almost entirely for the price of counsel.
11. 
    7 Oct 2007 ~ 8:15am deicist Personally I think copyright law needs major reform.
    
    How's this:
    
    A standard fine for copyright infringement (on a per person, not per item basis) or if you can conclusively prove that the infrigment led to the infringing party making a proft from your work, then you can sue for damages.
    
    This would protect the small innovator from competitors (the original intent of copyright law) whilst stopping huge companies enforcing their monopoly through the use of outdated copyright law.
    
    Of course, it'll never happen.