Has the RIAA's Fight Against File Sharing Gone Too Far? - Mercedes-Benz Forum

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 5 (permalink) Old 06-19-2009, 10:23 PM Thread Starter
Administratoris Emeritus
GeeS's Avatar
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,831
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 544 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Has the RIAA's Fight Against File Sharing Gone Too Far?

Jammie Thomas, a Minnesota mom, faces a $1.92 million fine for allegedly downloading a handful of copyrighted songs. Is $80,000 a song constitutional?

(PCWorld.com) Some legal experts question the constitutionality of a $1.92 million fine given to a woman accused of pirating 24 songs. A Minnesota jury ordered Jammie Thomas-Rasset to pay that yesterday, saying she "willfully" violated music copyrights and should cough up $80,000 per illegally downloaded track.

The verdict brings a new twist to a seemingly endless legal battle brought about by the Recording Industry of America (RIAA). The case originally culminated back in 2007, when a different jury slapped Thomas-Rasset with a $220,000 penalty (only about $9100 per song). Soon after, Thomas-Rasset filed an appeal and received a retrial, which led to this week's even costlier conclusion.

Jammie Thomas and the $80,000 Question

If $80,000 a song sounds unreasonable to you, you aren't alone: The blogosphere, as well as Twitter users, are buzzing with outrage. The shockwaves, by some accounts, started mere seconds after the verdict was announced.

"I think $2 million for downloading 24 songs strikes almost everyone as being a little disproportionate," says Fred von Lohmann, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "According to people who were in the courtroom, almost everyone inside uttered an audible gasp when that verdict came in."

The size of the fine was guided by U.S. copyright law, which provides for a penalty of anywhere from $750 to $150,000 per violation. It was up to the jury, however, to decide where to land within that spectrum. The problem, von Lohmann says, is that there are no meaningful guidelines on how that decision should be reached.

"The copyright law entitles people to essentially pull a number out of a hat, all the way up to $150,000 per song," he says. "If the copyright law were more reasonable--if, say, you had to make some sort of reasonable guess as to what the actual harm was--then I think juries would come in with more reasonable results."

The RIAA Case and the Constitution

Here's where things start to get dicey: The Supreme Court has previously indicated that "grossly excessive" punitive damage awards are a violation of the U.S. Constitution. An award can be considered "grossly excessive" if there's too big of a gap between the actual harm done and the amount of money being named. Courts can also consider the "degree of reprehensibility" of the defendant's actions, along with how the penalty compares to similar ones issued in the past.

It seems, then, there may be a clash between two ideals: The parameters of the copyright law and the protection provided by the Constitution. What's more, as the Electronic Frontier Foundation points out, recent Supreme Court rulings suggest a jury should determine damages based only on what's justified for the single defendant--not for the broader purpose of "sending a message" to the general public.

There's also the issue that the recording industry recently backed down from its heavily criticized process of suing suspected music sharers--people like Jammie Thomas-Rasset--and said it would instead start working with Internet service providers to find offenders and restrict their access. That means Thomas-Rasset's case is, to a large degree, a fight over the past.

"File sharers today doing exactly what Jammie Thomas had been doing do not stand any chance of being dragged into court," von Lohmann says. "The irony here is that five years and 35,000 lawsuit threats later, we have only one case that goes to trial--and it ends up giving us an outcome that I think everybody thinks is unsatisfactory."

The Next Steps

So what now? Any number of things could happen: Thomas-Rasset could move to settle the case; she could ask the judge to reduce the penalty; or she could file an appeal based on the constitutional concerns. She could also declare bankruptcy to try to avoid having to pay the full cost.

"It's hard to predict what exactly will happen next," von Lohmann says. "But it's certainly far from over."

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #2 of 5 (permalink) Old 06-19-2009, 10:31 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
Shane's Avatar
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: And what was left was what was guilt was what u gave to me
Location: A cavalcade of strangers came to tear ur world apart
Posts: 41,528
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1728 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Downloaded two songs in her honor just now.
Shane is offline  
post #3 of 5 (permalink) Old 06-19-2009, 10:36 PM
BenzWorld Elite
mzsmbs's Avatar
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1972 Mercedes 250 (/8) W114/M130
Location: on a high bank of a creek
Posts: 7,296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
hot coffee in lap happens too. life's a bitch.

in political asylum
mzsmbs is offline  
post #4 of 5 (permalink) Old 06-19-2009, 10:47 PM
BenzWorld Elite
lovemyc280's Avatar
Date registered: Oct 2003
Vehicle: 2004 Lexus LS 430 Modern Luxury. 2012 Acura TSX (fun fun) Maybe MB again one day...
Location: Provo Spain
Posts: 2,470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
I'd prefer they stick to suing 14 year olds, but whatever.
lovemyc280 is offline  
post #5 of 5 (permalink) Old 06-20-2009, 04:31 AM
Will Moderate For Cigars
cmitch's Avatar
Date registered: Apr 2005
Vehicle: 2002 ML320, 2005 S430 4MATIC, 2010 F150 Crew Cab
Location: City on the TN River
Posts: 10,673
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 200 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
It'll eventually land in the Supreme Court. While she should be punished, the actual amount of damages would be more reasonable along with a nice fine that she could realistically repay in her lifetime.

2005 S430 4Matic 'Morton' W220.183 • 722.671 Rest in Peace

Bells and whistles are thorns and thistles.
cmitch is offline  
Sponsored Links

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:


  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode

    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Copy of RIAA's new enforcement notice to ISPs Jakarta Expat Off-Topic 2 12-20-2008 11:01 AM
    just sharing :) unklekraker W203 C-Class 5 09-18-2007 09:32 AM
    Here is a Freak for you, training the boys to fight the "good" fight Jakarta Expat Off-Topic 9 03-06-2007 05:40 AM
    Fight Club - Who Would You Fight? Naomilla2.0 Off-Topic 6 01-05-2006 11:13 PM
    Not used to sharing attention! Progenitor R171 SLK-Class 4 08-18-2005 08:48 AM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On


    Title goes here

    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome