RIAA bid to block new Jammie Thomas trial
p2pnet news view P2P | RIAA News:- The champagne corks will be popping in RIAA-land, p2pnet posted in October last year, because »»»
“The recording industry won a key fight Thursday against illegal music downloading when a federal jury found a Minnesota woman shared copyrighted music online and levied $220,000 in damages against her.” ~ Associated Press.
“Jammie Thomas, a single mother of two, was found liable Thursday for copyright infringement in the nation’s first file-sharing case to go before a jury.” ~ Wired.
“After less than four hours of deliberations, a federal jury in Duluth, Minnesota, handed the RIAA a victory in the first file-sharing case to go to trial, finding that Jammie Thomas willfully infringed on the record labels’ copyrights, awarding them $222,000 in damages.” ~ Ars Technica.
It looked as though it was all over with Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG’s RIAA for the first time chalking up a legal precedent it’d be able to use against other sue ‘em all victims
But, “I’m sorry to hear that Ms. Thomas lost, but I don’t think the case is over by a long shot; the verdict – based as it upon an entirely erroneous jury instruction going to the very heart of the case – will almost definitely be set aside on appeal, said Recording Industry vs The People’s Ray Beckerman (right).
He was wrong. But only about the appeal because when it came down to the crunch, federal Minnesota judge Michael Davis, who’d heard the case, did a complete about turn, admitting he’d incorrectly instructed the jurors when he told them Thomas had infringed Big 4 copyrights by merely making copyrighted music available via Sharman Networks’ Kazaa file sharing application.
Nor, after terrorising close to 40,000 American families with spurious subpoenas, has the RIAA been able to move one further step forward.
Instead, it’s back at Square One, now desperately trying to get a federal appeals court to second guess Davis’ decision.
Will it succeed? Not even nearly, says Beckerman.
“Let’s step back for a moment,” he told p2pnet. “The judge vacated the verdict because the first time around he had allowed himself to be misled by the RIAA lawyers.
“He’s now researched the issue thoroughly, and knows that he’s right, and that the RIAA was dead wrong.
“He’s not going to let himself be snowed again.”
Davis hasn’t even scheduled a date for the new Thomas trial, and RIAA attack lawyers most definitely don’t want that to happen, demanding permission to appeal the Court’s September 24, 2008, decision setting the $222,000 jury verdict aside, says Beckerman on Recording Industry vs The People.
But, he states, this latest RIAA effort, “flies in the face of everything we know about modern federal appellate practice in the United States.”
Appeals are almost never permitted except from a final judgment, Beckerman told p2pnet, going on »»»
Where the case is ready for trial, as this one is, the likelihood of a motion like this being granted, and of the trial being delayed to accommodate it, is nil.
Whats more, in view of the judge’s suggestion that, had he not set the verdict aside for this reason, he probably would have set it aside due to the excessive damages, allowing an appeal from one legal issue would be completely contrary to judicial efficiency.
Definitely stay tuned.
Recording Industry vs The People – RIAA asks for permission to appeal from Capitol Records v. Thomas order setting verdict aside, October 15, 2008
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.
October 16th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
RIAA sez, “Bu, bu, but… our precedent… You’re taking our PRECEDENT!!!! We spent A LOT OF MONEY for that! Lobbying, bribes, kickbacks, thousands of lawsuits… DAMN! We had it! You’re STEALING it from us… WHAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaa…”
(sorry, couldn’t resist)
October 17th, 2008 at 9:58 am
The RIAA and Directv have just too much money for innocent people to fight. Because of this innocent people are handing over thousands to these huge money mongers. The little guy has to use passive resistance much like Gandhi did. Gandhi used passive resistance because the Brittish were so large and powerful that there was little or nothing the common person in India could do. Because the Justice should be protecting innocent people in these cases, resistance has to be against Justice for not protecting. The settlement agreements people had to sign also take away constitutional rights. Because Justice votes not to help the little guy falsely accused by Directv or RIAA, then the little guy should vote against Justice the next time they are a Juror or the next time they witness a crime. Understand that when the innocent person was sued, Justice looked the other way and failed to protect. As a juror, you are doing no different.