Will Jammie Thomas be found guilty?
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- A question posed by jurors at the trial of RIAA victim Jammie Thomas suggests they’re seriously considering finding her guilty as charged – that’s to say, guilty of copyright infringement, says Wired’s David Kravets from Duluth, Minnesota, where it’s winding up.
They’ve asked US district judge Michael Davis to, “instruct them on the minimum amount of damages they could render,” says the story, going on:
The verdict form said if jurors believe Thomas’ file sharing on Kazaa was “willful,” they can ding her for up to $150,000 for each of the 24 violations in the case. But the form left off the minimum, $750, per violation.
“They just want to know what the bottom figure is for willful,” the judge told lawyers during a brief proceeding.
She has 24 counts lodged against her.
But if the jury does vote in favour of Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG’s RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America), the news will spread like wild-fire on- and offline and hatred of the RIAA and the companies which keep it alive will mushroom exponentially, with all that implies.
Few people who are familiar with the four-year sue ‘em all war believe the labels are justified in waging it and a win for the Big 4 could easily turn Thomas into a cause – a martyr, in effect – prompting a far more intensified and widespread boycott of corporate music product than exists at the moment.
Stay tuned.
Jon Newton – p2pnet
Also See:
Wired – Question From Jury Room Ominous for RIAA Defendant, October 4, 2007
RIAA victim Jammie Thomas – RIAA`s Cary Sherman is `surprised, October 4, 2007
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
October 4th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
wtf…
how can this be?
October 4th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
It isn’t, yet …
October 4th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
but that sure sounds ominous
October 4th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
How ??
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071004-debate-over-making-available-jury-instruction-as-capitol-v-thomas-wraps-up.html
The making available argument was pretty critical. to quote the updated article …
” Toder disagreed, but at the end, Judge Davis amended the instruction to say that the “act of making available for electronic distribution… violates the copyright owner’s exclusive copyright.” That decision should make it easier for the jury to find Thomas liable. ”
Utter Bull crap.
It’s time to seriously investigate just what connections this judge has with the industry.
Does he have record contract like Judge Richard Owen ??
October 4th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
its over. she lost. i cant believe it
ars technica on the front page.
October 4th, 2007 at 6:06 pm
I predict overturn on appeal or declared a mistrial for inappropriate jury instruction.
October 5th, 2007 at 1:31 am
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/34209/118/
its so insane! something is seriously wrong.. either the judge was bought or the jury, no way a sane judge would do that!
other times they basicly gotten thrown out of court and this time was no different, yet they won bigtime???? something was done…
October 5th, 2007 at 5:06 am
$9, 250 per song?
A quarter of a million dollars in total?
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7029229.stm)
I don’t see how anyone working as a lawyer for the record companies can sleep at night. Oh yeah, because they’re earning millions of dollars. This hasn’t got anything to do with the money, it must surely just be for the media to scare the living daylights out of everyone else.
That rulijg by the judge is total, f****g rubbish. ‘available for e-distribution’ is one thing; proof of someone actually downloading is another; therefore the industry has absolutely zero proof that it has lost any money from this.
Total, absolute ba*tards.
October 5th, 2007 at 10:13 am
Correct decision. It’s theft and we all know it.
October 5th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Readers Write is right! The whole thing is dumb I dont see anyway that the record company can ever lose either you pay the first fee or you go to court and pay even more money. Read this a good quality opinion on the matter.
October 5th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
adamos, read the details.
yep, those thousands of dollars she spent on music sure was theft. and the fact she was often seen ripping her hundreds of legal cd’s onto her computer is perfectly illegal too. what a great and moral verdict. sue your customers for giving you money. brilliant strategy.
nothing was proved, so much for our legal system. innocent until proven guilty (as long as the plaintiff has tons of money to spend against you)
October 7th, 2007 at 11:33 am
You know what ? this is a good thing.
for sure her 2 childs will neverever buy anymore any craps from the mafia of america and probably the family friends will do the same.
anyhow, did someone know the names of the jurors ? Did they have an internet connection ? Did they ever downloaded anything from the net ? What they will do if they are sued for the same stupid reason ? Just some question…