$1.92 million for illegal music downloads.

[Hardbopjazz]

Jury rules against Minn. woman in download case

By STEVE KARNOWSKI, Associated Press Writer Steve Karnowski, Associated Press Writer – Thu Jun 18, 9:08 pm ET

MINNEAPOLIS – A replay of the nation's only file-sharing case to go to trial has ended with the same result — a Minnesota woman was found to have violated music copyrights and must pay huge damages to the recording industry.

A federal jury ruled Thursday that Jammie Thomas-Rasset willfully violated the copyrights on 24 songs, and awarded recording companies $1.92 million, or $80,000 per song.

Thomas-Rasset's second trial actually turned out worse for her. When a different federal jury heard her case in 2007, it hit Thomas-Rasset with a $222,000 judgment.

The new trial was ordered after the judge in the case decided he had erred in giving jury instructions.

Thomas-Rasset sat glumly with her chin in hand as she heard the jury's finding of willful infringement, which increased the potential penalty. She raised her eyebrows in surprise when the jury's penalty of $80,000 per song was read.

Outside the courtroom, she called the $1.92 million figure "kind of ridiculous" but expressed resignation over the decision.

Full Story

[Claude]

If that is the actual damage she is supposed to have caused?

I thought punitive damages would only be granted when the accused (for example a large company) can afford to pay them.

[kh1958]

Monetary penalties for violation of U.S. copyright law are quite draconian--Congress has responded to "lobbying" (campaign contributions) by the recording industry.

Maybe those Spanish pirates aren't so bad after all.

[Alexander]

Monetary penalties for violation of U.S. copyright law are quite draconian--Congress has responded to "lobbying" (campaign contributions) by the recording industry.

Maybe those Spanish pirates aren't so bad after all.

Hell, the *Somali* pirates don't sound so bad in comparison!

[sheldonm]

...Swiping someone else's stuff is wrong....but this is just plain silly .

[Jim Alfredson]

These kind of rulings will prove to have the exact opposite effect that the RIAA wants them to have. Instead of scaring people, more people will view the RIAA as the monster it has become and "fight the power", so to speak.

[Alexander]

These kind of rulings will prove to have the exact opposite effect that the RIAA wants them to have. Instead of scaring people, more people will view the RIAA as the monster it has become and "fight the power", so to speak.

I agree. The barn door has been opened and the horse is gone. All the kicking and screaming and lawsuits in the world ain't gonna put the genie back in the bottle, if I may mix my metaphors...

[Claude]

After the Pirate Bay verdict in Sweden, the local Pirate Party got 7% at the European Parliament elections and now has one seat in that parliament.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party

I don't expect a similar thing to happen in the US, but surely this verdict will make some politicians react, given how widespread filesharing is.

[Swinging Swede]

After the Pirate Bay verdict in Sweden, the local Pirate Party got 7% at the European Parliament elections and now has one seat in that parliament.

Not only that, but among voters up to 30 years of age they became the *largest* party, getting nearly 20%.

All in all, parties not represented in the national parliamant got over 16% of the votes. Significant changes surely are ahead in the Swedish political landscape.

[Van Basten II]

After the war on drugs the war on downloads.

[Royal Oak]

Good luck in recovering the $1.92 million. I wonder how much it cost the companies involved to pursue this action?

[A Lark Ascending]

How much do companies get fined for making cluster bombs?

Oh, sorry. That's legal.

Must focus on the real criminals...illegal filesharers.

Edited June 20, 2009 by Bev Stapleton