Jammie v the RIAA: final day?
p2pnet news view RIAA | P2P:-“In say ten or twenty years, we will look back and think that it was really crazy/dumb to sue ordinary people for sharing stuff online,” says NoOne in a Reader’s Write, going on »»»
I mean, I do it, everybody does it and it’s not going to change. More importantly, it’s good to do so. That being said, who’s going to repair all the harm caused to Jammie? Hey, she just shared a few songs online like millions of us and she’s being attacked, harassed and intimidated by multinational corporations which use laws that were written to target commercial, enterprise-scale copyright violations, at a time when Internet was pure science-fiction.
He adds, “Now, if that’s not terrorism, what is it?”
It’s terrorism, it’s government sanctioned, and it’s being used by Vivendi Universal (France), Sony (Japan), EMI (Britain), and Warner Music (US) to frighten music lovers not only in America, but around the world into becoming compliant corporate consumers.
No One’s comment comes in in response to another Reader’s Write, this time from Jammie Thomas-Rasset’s husband, Chad, who’s being forced, as we posted, “to sit and watch while teams of highly paid lawyers try to prove his wife is one of millions, if we are to believe the labels, of illegal online distributors of copyrighted music whose activities are robbing the multi-billion-dollar labels of their rightful dues.”
We also wrote, “Jammie Thomas-Rasset isn’t the defendant in the one and only case Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music’s RIAA has managed to get into a civil court room.
“Rather, she’s the most visible of the 40,000 or so innocent Americans, including very young children, who are being victimised by the Big 4 corporate music labels as part of their plan to gain total control of how, and by whom, music is shared online.”
And it would all have gone away had Jammie being willing to cave in to extortionate RIAA demands.
She’s the mother of four who far from being a file sharing criminal, is the responsible and dedicated the Brownfield coordinator of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Indians in Minnesota where she administers a grant from the US Environmental Protection Agency for her tribe to redevelop contaminated properties. She’s also in charge of housing and land acquisitions for the Band’s Department of Natural Resources and Environment.
Had she been willing to pay the Big 4 labels RIAA $5,000, the amount they’d demanded to ’settle’ an unproven copyright infringement case, the lawsuit would never have happened.
But as she’s told p2pnet several times, she’s fighting not only for herself, but for other Americans terrorised by the Big 4 record labels only one of which — Warner — is based in the US, and even that’s run by a Edgar Bronfman jr, a Canadian and a member of one of the country’s wealthiest families.
Of bright moral lines …
Ironically, as we pointed out in a story on two other American mothers similarly terrorised by the RIAA, “We asked Edgar Bronfman, the head of the world’s fourth largest music company … whether any of his seven kids stole music,” said Reuters,.
“I’m fairly certain that they have, and I’m fairly certain that they’ve suffered the consequences,” Bronfman stated, going on »»»
“I explained to them what I believe is right, that the principle is that stealing music is stealing music. Frankly, right is right and wrong is wrong, particularly when a parent is talking to a child. A bright line around moral responsibility is very important. I can assure you they no longer do that.”
What did the “bright line” involve?
Whatever that was, it certainly had nothing to do with moral responsibility and, “I think I’ll keep that within the family,” evaded Bronfman, the Canadian who heads cartel member Warner Music.
One thing is 100%, solid gold, carved-in-rock certain, though. Neither he nor his children will ever be sued, or loudly and publicly harassed by the RIAA for copyright infringement.
But just as there are no accusations of being criminals and thieves for the Bronfmans, there are no bright lines for Jammie.
‘Thomas not only gained no profits from her alleged illegal activities, she sought no profits …’
Yesterday was Day Two of the RIAA’s second effort to have Jammie found guilty of copyright infringement, but although various online pundits had predicted the trial would go on for a week, or possibly even longer, it could be over today.
Stay tuned, and remember the words of judge Michael Davis when he wound up the first Jamie vs the RIAA Trial, writing in Civil File No. 06?1497 »»»
While the Court does not discount Plaintiffs’ claim that, cumulatively, illegal downloading has far-reaching effects on their businesses, the damages awarded in this case are wholly disproportionate to the damages suffered by Plaintiffs. Thomas allegedly infringed on the copyrights of 24 songs – the equivalent of approximately three CDs, costing less than $54, and yet the total damages awarded is $222,000 – more than five hundred times the cost of buying 24 separate CDs and more than four thousand times the cost of three CDs. While the Copyright Act was intended to permit statutory damages that are larger than the simple cost of the infringed works in order to make infringing a far less attractive alternative than legitimately purchasing the songs, surely damages that are more than one hundred times the cost of the works would serve as a sufficient deterrent.
Thomas not only gained no profits from her alleged illegal activities, she sought no profits. Part of the justification for large statutory damages awards in copyright cases is to deter actors by ensuring that the possible penalty for infringing substantially outweighs the potential gain from infringing. In the case of commercial actors, the potential gain in revenues is enormous and enticing to potential infringers. In the case of individuals who infringe by using peer-to-peer networks, the potential gain from infringement is access to free music, not the possibility of hundreds of thousands – or even millions – of dollars in profits.
This fact means that statutory damages awards of hundreds of thousands of dollars is certainly far greater than necessary to accomplish Congress’s goal of deterrence.
“Unfortunately, by using Kazaa, Thomas acted like countless other Internet users,” Davis stated, adding:
“Her alleged acts were illegal, but common. Her status as a consumer who was not seeking to harm her competitors or make a profit does not excuse her behavior. But it does make the award of hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages unprecedented and oppressive.”
June, 2009
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.
June 17th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Warner should be raided and Edgar Bronfman jr should be arrested for extortion and constitutional violation!
June 17th, 2009 at 11:34 am
Today is the end for the MAFIRIAA!!
June 17th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
the governments need to realize that their employers are their constiuents, not these clowns that throw money at them, it is there duty to represent the people of their constiuency. along with the mafiaa clowns, i think any government official that has taken a single cent from these clowns be charged with treason and accessory. they are not doing their jobs. plain and simple
June 17th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
I live in Norway, and we follow this case intensly. Suing of individual filesharers has even reached us, and now they are violating basic civil rights, privacy rights and more just to retain the illusion of control. The worst part is that this is happening not only with the permission of our government, but with their blessings and active encouragement. Even if every single forum is filled with outrage and no single voter is speaking up for the industry, the minister of culture and his entourage still steps on the people on behalf of the record industry…all while talking about poor artists which generally dont like the development at all!