DoJ sides with RIAA in Thomas appeal - bit-tech.net Forums

Tim S · 6th Dec 2007, 12:10

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/12...homas_appeal/1

The Department of Justice has sided with the RIAA in Jammie Thomas' appeal against her copyright infringement ruling.

steveo_mcg · 6th Dec 2007, 12:11

Hands up who's surprised??

quack · 6th Dec 2007, 12:17

I wonder how she's going to pay it.

HugoB · 6th Dec 2007, 12:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by quack

I wonder how she's going to pay it.

Selling boot-leg DVDs on the street

Scary precident though...

yakyb · 6th Dec 2007, 12:31

how long owuld the jail sentance be for not being able to pay?

samkiller42 · 6th Dec 2007, 12:32

I think she may have to give these people a call:

Quote:

Originally Posted by oceanfinance

Whether you are looking to consolidate your existing finances into one manageable monthly payment, considering carrying out some overdue home improvements or perhaps think now is the right time for you to consider a complete remortgage package, we could have the right solution for you.

On a more serious note, i still think 4k per song is a little ott, however, as it said in the report, it is to act like a deterrent, however still, they could have been less greedy, but hey.

Sam

yakyb · 6th Dec 2007, 12:46

plus i thought it was against the law to make an example of some one by giving them a large sentance

TreeDude · 6th Dec 2007, 12:58

She made some big mistakes in the case. She deserved what she got for her stupidity. You don't have your HD wiped after finding out your going to court for file sharing. She has now made it harder for when the next person tries to fight it.

Leitchy · 6th Dec 2007, 13:01

£4500 for 24 songs, I may aswell make myself bankrupt and go into hiding!

Drexial · 6th Dec 2007, 13:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by samkiller42

On a more serious note, i still think 24k per song is a little ott, however, as it said in the report,
Sam

its so she can never afford another computer again.

Bauul · 6th Dec 2007, 13:26

Meh, it's bad luck for her, but will this have any effect on anyone else in the world anywhere?

Of course not.

Tim S · 6th Dec 2007, 13:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leitchy

£4500 for 24 songs, I may aswell make myself bankrupt and go into hiding!

don't forget it's 4500 quid per song, not collectively...

chiper136 · 6th Dec 2007, 13:52

Thats...just evil...so many people file share so much more, they could have at least some ******* who blatantly deserved it for like sharing a couple thousand files or something, but a single mother being done for 24 songs, thats just going to give them lots of negative press.

<A88> · 6th Dec 2007, 14:12

It wasn't just 24 songs she shared though- the prosecution accused her of sharing 1700, but the record companies only charged her for 24 of them. Add to this the fact that she seems to have lied her way through the court case instead of opting for the out-of-court-settlement and you'd be inclined to think that she was maybe hoping to become more a martyr of the file-sharing community than a rational single mother who knows what financial responsibility is.

<A88>

steveo_mcg · 6th Dec 2007, 14:27

But you can't be fined for sharing 1700 songs if you're only charged with sharing 24. This is effectively an illegal fine under US law but since the whole country is paid for by big business its been upheld. But yeah i agree she's tried to fight the system which is slightly silly in her situation, but hey maybe she doesn't like bullies.

<A88> · 6th Dec 2007, 14:52

She wasn't fined for 1700- only 24, and at 1/3rd of the maximum fine at that. I'm not saying it's reasonable- it actually seems like an extortionate amount of money to me, but she didn't do herself any favours by fighting a losing battle anyway. She didn't really have a leg to stand on in the first place, so getting a lawyer to act as crutches has just made the wound a lot worse.

<A88>

Drexial · 6th Dec 2007, 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveo_mcg

But you can't be fined for sharing 1700 songs if you're only charged with sharing 24. This is effectively an illegal fine under US law but since the whole country is paid for by big business its been upheld. But yeah i agree she's tried to fight the system which is slightly silly in her situation, but hey maybe she doesn't like bullies.

she wasnt fined for all 1700, she was fined about $9,000 per song = $220,000 for all 24 songs. she was looking at over a million dollar fine maximum just for those 24 songs.

pendragon · 6th Dec 2007, 18:19

the fine was excessive IMHO, but yea, this woman shot herself in the foot so to speak

it really stinks, as I'd love the RIAA to die a firey death

Rebourne · 6th Dec 2007, 20:40

Thats absurd, copyright laws were made to protect copyright holders from other people making money off of what they created. If she was out on the street corner selling a bunch of burned CD's to people and making a bunch of money the fine might be fair.

quack · 6th Dec 2007, 22:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by TreeDude

She made some big mistakes in the case. She deserved what she got for her stupidity. You don't have your HD wiped after finding out your going to court for file sharing. She has now made it harder for when the next person tries to fight it.

But she didn't have it wiped, she had it replaced.

6th Dec 2007, 12:10	#1
Tim S Pewlius Caesar bit-tech Staff Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Ascot, Berks Posts: 18,021	DoJ sides with RIAA in Thomas appeal http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/12...homas_appeal/1 The Department of Justice has sided with the RIAA in Jammie Thomas' appeal against her copyright infringement ruling. __________________ Tim on Twitter \| Tim's Blog \| Tim's Flickr The bit-tech Blog \| bit-tech on Twitter \| Join the bit-tech & Custom PC folding team (#35947)

6th Dec 2007, 12:11	#2
steveo_mcg What owl? Join Date: May 2005 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 3,990	Hands up who's surprised?? __________________ No boom today, boom tomorrow... there's always a boom tomorrow.

6th Dec 2007, 12:17	#3
quack \o/ Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: England Posts: 5,221	I wonder how she's going to pay it. __________________ Denying Rights to Music lovers. Denying Rights to Movie lovers.

6th Dec 2007, 12:31	#5
yakyb CK is God!!! Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,071	how long owuld the jail sentance be for not being able to pay? __________________ Gaming Box:: q6600 @3.0 :: 9800gtx :: Abit IP35 :: 4gb :: 1.4TB :: akasa eclipse :: Win7 Development:: PhenomII 955BE @3.2 :: 4200 :: asus M4A785 M Evo :: 1.25TB ::Win7 Media Centre :: q6600 @3.0 :: x1950pro :: asus p35 epu :: 8gb :: 320 GB :: Lc17B :: Win7 server:: I7 860 :: p55 gd65 :: 3450 :: 8 TB :: 8gb :: Rebel 12 :: server 2008 R2

6th Dec 2007, 12:46	#7
yakyb CK is God!!! Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,071	plus i thought it was against the law to make an example of some one by giving them a large sentance __________________ Gaming Box:: q6600 @3.0 :: 9800gtx :: Abit IP35 :: 4gb :: 1.4TB :: akasa eclipse :: Win7 Development:: PhenomII 955BE @3.2 :: 4200 :: asus M4A785 M Evo :: 1.25TB ::Win7 Media Centre :: q6600 @3.0 :: x1950pro :: asus p35 epu :: 8gb :: 320 GB :: Lc17B :: Win7 server:: I7 860 :: p55 gd65 :: 3450 :: 8 TB :: 8gb :: Rebel 12 :: server 2008 R2

6th Dec 2007, 12:58	#8
TreeDude Multimodder Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 239	She made some big mistakes in the case. She deserved what she got for her stupidity. You don't have your HD wiped after finding out your going to court for file sharing. She has now made it harder for when the next person tries to fight it.

6th Dec 2007, 13:01	#9
Leitchy Supermodder Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Scotland Posts: 255	£4500 for 24 songs, I may aswell make myself bankrupt and go into hiding!

6th Dec 2007, 13:26	#11
Bauul Sir Bongaminge Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Godalming, near Guildford Posts: 1,553	Meh, it's bad luck for her, but will this have any effect on anyone else in the world anywhere? Of course not. __________________ Pentium 4 CPU 3.4 Ghz \| 1Gb + 2x512Mb Corsair DDR2 667 Mhz Sapphire Radeon HD 4770 512Mb\| WD Raptor 36Gb, Seagate 300Gb \| Asus P5LD2 SE Ibanez RG 470 Japanese Edition \| 1991 Japanese Lo-TRS Tremolo \| V7 S1 Custom V8 HSH Pickups

6th Dec 2007, 13:52	#13
chiper136 Modder Join Date: May 2007 Location: You Kay Posts: 66	Thats...just evil...so many people file share so much more, they could have at least some ******* who blatantly deserved it for like sharing a couple thousand files or something, but a single mother being done for 24 songs, thats just going to give them lots of negative press.

6th Dec 2007, 14:12	#14
<A88> Trust the Computer Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Bournemouth Posts: 4,797	It wasn't just 24 songs she shared though- the prosecution accused her of sharing 1700, but the record companies only charged her for 24 of them. Add to this the fact that she seems to have lied her way through the court case instead of opting for the out-of-court-settlement and you'd be inclined to think that she was maybe hoping to become more a martyr of the file-sharing community than a rational single mother who knows what financial responsibility is. <A88>

6th Dec 2007, 14:27	#15
steveo_mcg What owl? Join Date: May 2005 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 3,990	But you can't be fined for sharing 1700 songs if you're only charged with sharing 24. This is effectively an illegal fine under US law but since the whole country is paid for by big business its been upheld. But yeah i agree she's tried to fight the system which is slightly silly in her situation, but hey maybe she doesn't like bullies. __________________ No boom today, boom tomorrow... there's always a boom tomorrow.

6th Dec 2007, 14:52	#16
<A88> Trust the Computer Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Bournemouth Posts: 4,797	She wasn't fined for 1700- only 24, and at 1/3rd of the maximum fine at that. I'm not saying it's reasonable- it actually seems like an extortionate amount of money to me, but she didn't do herself any favours by fighting a losing battle anyway. She didn't really have a leg to stand on in the first place, so getting a lawyer to act as crutches has just made the wound a lot worse. <A88>

6th Dec 2007, 18:19	#18
pendragon I pickle they Join Date: May 2004 Location: Massachusetts,usa Posts: 632	the fine was excessive IMHO, but yea, this woman shot herself in the foot so to speak it really stinks, as I'd love the RIAA to die a firey death __________________ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- GCS d-@ s-:>: a- C++$ UL---@ P++>+++++$ L+ E----@ W+++ N o? K? w++>+++++ O---@ M-- V? PS--() PE+@ Y? PGP-@ t+(+++) 5(+)@ X@ R+(++) tv@ b++ DI@ D++ G e++>+++++ h! r(%) y? ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

6th Dec 2007, 20:40	#19
Rebourne Supermodder Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 321	Thats absurd, copyright laws were made to protect copyright holders from other people making money off of what they created. If she was out on the street corner selling a bunch of burned CD's to people and making a bunch of money the fine might be fair.