Last month the federal judge in the Jammie Thomas file sharing case did something you don't see very often. He admitted that he may have been wrong when he gave instructions to the jury before they began deliberating, which may lead to a new trial. In case you don't remember, the jury ruled in favor of the RIAA, who claimed that since Thomas' computer had songs shared on a P2P network she ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
Quote:When she lost, she was then told to pay $9,250 for each of the 24 songs, a hugely disproportionate number.
Quote:It's unlikely that her sharing the files resulted in anyone losing $222,000 in sales. While there seems to be a good chance she could get a new trial, there's no reason to assume it will end better for her.
I'm still amazed at what they think they can nail her for in damages. It's grossly ridiculous.
I hope she does get another trial, i don't think she'll walk away from it free and clear, but maybe it will end up better than owing $222,000.
Quote:he has consistently taken the RIAA to task for their calculation of damages, which he sees as not just excessive but also beyond the scope of the law. Rather than $750 per song for a total of nearly $7000 he argues that the maximum allowed by law would be the actual cost of the same tracks if purchased ($8.91 for 9 songs) multiplied by a statutory maximum of 9 for a total of $56.70.
Ironically that's the same argument that Universal Music Group, the plaintiffs in this case, used to get damages reduced after losing a copyright infringement case related to sampling where they were the among the defendants.
Quote:Someone with a username that Jammie Thomas is known to have used for other services shared files via P2P that were subsequently found to be shared on her computer.
Are you kidding me? How many times have you gone to a site and tried to sign up with a name you use frequently only to find out that it's taken already? Just because they used a specific username elsewhere doesn't mean it was them on the P2P network.
Quote:Someone with a username that Jammie Thomas is known to have used for other services shared files via P2P that were subsequently found to be shared on her computer.
Are you kidding me? How many times have you gone to a site and tried to sign up with a name you use frequently only to find out that it's taken already? Just because they used a specific username elsewhere doesn't mean it was them on the P2P network.
