Cupe Posted June 19, 2009 Posted June 19, 2009 Source: http://www.theage.com.au/technology/mus ... -cn4u.htmlA US jury has ordered a 32-year-old woman to pay $US1.92 million ($A2.4 million) in damages for illegally downloading 24 songs in a high-profile digital piracy case.Jammie Thomas-Rasset, a single mother of four from the US state of Minnesota, was found liable for using the Kazaa peer-to-peer file-sharing network to download the songs over the internet.The jury took just under five hours to reach its verdict.It ordered Thomas-Rasset to pay $US1.92 million dollars - or $US80,000 ($A100,000) per song - to six record companies: Capitol Records, Sony BMG Music, Arista Records, Interscope Records, Warner Bros. Records and UMG Recordings.Thomas-Rasset had been convicted previously, in October 2007, and ordered to pay $US220,000 ($A275,000) in damages but the judge who presided over that trial threw out the verdict calling it "wholly disproportionate" and "oppressive".The Recording Industry Association of America and major music labels have brought suit against thousands of people for illegally downloading and sharing music, with most agreeing to settlements of between $3000 and $5000.Thomas-Rasset was the first among those being sued to refuse a settlement and instead took the case to court.In December, the RIAA said it would stop suing people who download music illegally and focus instead on getting Internet Service Providers to take action.The move away from litigation represented a major shift in strategy for the music industry group, which had filed lawsuits against some 35,000 people for online music piracy since 2003. Quote
Genetic Posted June 19, 2009 Posted June 19, 2009 so it's taken the step to the next level then Quote
Tomy Posted June 19, 2009 Posted June 19, 2009 yeh well i guess so. the fine is a bit over the top. Quote
Genetic Posted June 19, 2009 Posted June 19, 2009 insert dennis quote "i told you all that this would happen" Quote
Skank Posted June 19, 2009 Posted June 19, 2009 lmao dennis hahahahahahaha man 80grand a song r they fuckin serious id riot of that sorta thing Quote
Genetic Posted June 20, 2009 Posted June 20, 2009 i think they did that because it was the second time she was in court over this, but it doesn't say she was using the music for any financial gain so as a personal user it's bullshit, even the settlements of between 3-5000 are bullshit 24 songs does not equate to that amount fucking rip off Quote
Andy_is Posted June 20, 2009 Posted June 20, 2009 Its crazy, expecially when the record companies have been ripping people off for years. Quote
Andy_is Posted June 20, 2009 Posted June 20, 2009 If they were smart they would have jumped on the mp3 train way before they did. Quote
Genetic Posted June 20, 2009 Posted June 20, 2009 but there is so much more money in vinyl and cd when it is mass produced Quote
Andy_is Posted June 20, 2009 Posted June 20, 2009 Some times there is no other way than the way of the future. People wont buy in the quantity they did if its avablible in an easier and cheaper format. Quote
Genetic Posted June 21, 2009 Posted June 21, 2009 yeah it's the "like this is the only time we'll ever be able to fuck the record company" but in doing so the artist does cop a little bit Quote
RhemyD Posted June 29, 2009 Posted June 29, 2009 meh the record industry wouldnt have a problem if they still gave out promo copies to professional DJ's considering we are 50-90% of the promotions!! Quote
RhemyD Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 untill they do then they can either pay me for promoting their records label or they can shut their traps Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.