But Jammie is having none of it.
“They want me to take a settlement of $25,000 without me knowing what I’m agreeing to,” she told p2pnet.
“The offer has been made without any kind of explanation what the settlement would involve.
“But I’m still not caving in. If they want to settle, they can do it on my terms.”
$2,250 instead of $80,000 per song
The “need for deterrence cannot justify a $2 million verdict for stealing and illegally distributing 24 songs for the sole purpose of obtaining free music,” wrote judge Michael J. Davis in a decision saying she now owes Big Music $2,250 instead of $80,000 for each of 24 songs she’s said to have downloaded without permission.
“Moreover, although Plaintiffs were not required to prove their actual damages, statutory damages must still bear some relation to actual damages,” he said.
“The Judge did not reach the constitutional due process issue raised by Ms. Thomas-Rasset’s counsel, instead deciding the motion based upon standard principles of ‘remittitur’,” said Ray Beckerman on Recording Industry vs The People, going on >>>
The judge described the standard for remittitur as follows:
so grossly excessive as to shock the conscience of the court. A verdict is not considered excessive unless there is plain injustice or a monstrous or shocking result
Now, “Here’s what I’m telling them,” says Jammie.
“You guys can settle this on my terms or take it to trial and try to prove the damages.
“You’re going to be lucky to prove more than $24 … ”
Jon Newton – p2pnet
..… and identi.ca
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi
$1.92 million dollars to $54,000 – Jammie Thomas-Rasset award reduced …, January 22, 2010
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/feed
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.