Comments on: Jammie Thomas $1.92 million ‘unconstitutional’

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:21:33 +0000

âpeople who steal from the music industryâ

That’s been phrased ass-backwards.

By: Dreddsnik

Dreddsnik — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 13:42:54 +0000

” âCould the first poster also be the third poster, do you think?â

Wrong. Your paranoia is starting to get the better of you. ”

Ummm , no.

Just because you pretend to be different posters, doesn’t mean others are stupid
enough not to notice.

Fact: every single time someone has proclaimed someone else to be ‘paranoid’. it was because they
were discovered. You just proved Jon and the rest of us correct.

So .. give .. pay by the word or the post, i’m curious too, and I need cash.

By: surfer

surfer — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:23:47 +0000

and her eventual victory…

By: Jon

Jon — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:16:50 +0000

“I was disappointed to learn that the article was simply about her appeal.”

I’m sorry that was the way you saw it, but her appeal isn’t exactly bad news, and there’s still a very long way for Jammie to go before the Fat Lady sings — copyrighted, of course.

Cheers!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 21:31:12 +0000

“Could the first poster also be the third poster, do you think?”

Wrong. Your paranoia is starting to get the better of you.

I got excited when I saw the headline and was hoping for good news. I was disappointed to learn that the article was simply about her appeal.

By: Monkey D. Luffy

Monkey D. Luffy — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 19:45:07 +0000

Hey Don! I need some extra money. I wanna be a corporate shill too! So tell me, how do they pay you? Is it per post, or per word? Can you actually make a living from it or is it just part time extra income? C’mon Don, spill the beans, I won’t tell. You can TRUST me

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 18:54:08 +0000

âpeople who steal from the music industryâ
for a second I read that as âpeople who steal from the musiciansâ and I thought that is the industry

By: Gr8oldies

Gr8oldies — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 18:10:59 +0000

“people who steal from the music industry” Isn’t that getting a little old? but I digress.

By: Cynix

Cynix — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 18:07:53 +0000

“However, having quickly scanned other posts on this site, I am not at all surprised by this clear attempt to misrepresent the case

*to favor people who steal from the music industry.*”

Could this possibly, in any way, be an RIAA shill or a troll. Nah, impossible!

By: Jon

Jon — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:20:48 +0000

Could the first poster also be the third poster, do you think?

Cheers!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:13:44 +0000

In reply to the first poster, I quite agree. I came across this story from Google and I am dismayed that it has not been either deleted or corrected. However, having quickly scanned other posts on this site, I am not at all surprised by this clear attempt to misrepresent the case to favor people who steal from the music industry.

Don

By: Monkey D. Luffy

Monkey D. Luffy — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:09:26 +0000

The Judge says it’s OK, Jesus (Obama) says it’s OK, the RIAA says it’s OK, so why shouldn’t the 12 pinheads on the jury agree?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:50:27 +0000

The headline is highly misleading, making people think the issue has already been decided in her favor.