LIFERS WHAT DO YALL THINK ABOUT THIS ??

JD 51 Comments 0 like

Verdict Reached In Minn. Music Downloading Case
June 18, 2009 – Legal and Management

By Associated Press

A federal jury in Minneapolis has ruled a Minnesota woman violated several music copyrights in the nation’s only file-sharing case to go to trial.

The jury found that Jammie Thomas-Rasset “committed willful violation” of the copyrights on 24 songs. The jury awarded the recording companies $1.92 million, or $80,000 per song.

It was a retrial for Thomas-Rasset, who was also found in 2007 to have illegally shared music files. The new trial was ordered after the judge in the case decided he had erred in jury instructions.

The second outcome was worse for Thomas-Rasset. In the first trial, the jury awarded recording companies just $222,000.

Share This Post
Have your say!
00
51 Comments

  1. CAN SHE PAY? I DON’T KNOW HER. HOWEVER IF SHE IS A RICH WOMEN WHICH I HIGHLY… THEN SHE CAN MAKE THE CHECK OUT TO WHO EVER. IF SHE ISN’T RICH THEN THE RECORD LABEL MIGHTS AS WELL TAKE THAT…

  2. the fine is excessive…however, it may just be the court’s way of getting people’s attention.

  3. all them need to stop playin cuz all of them gettin shit off limewire right now. and that fine is excessive. and who is going to pay that? they can’t make her pay that much for pretty much two cds. i understand that “file-sharing” is kinda playing with people’s money but with every other artist out there putting out mixtape after mixtape does it even matter any more? ocean guys, yall all have something to with recording artist, how do yall feel about that is the question. I respect and admire people in the industry but i honestly feel that this is ridiculous.

  4. That’s a HEFTY fine and I understand they probably want to make an example of her, but DAMN $1.92 million, what ordinary citizen has that kind of cash laying around?

  5. Looks like they are trying to make an example of her, so no one will do it in the future. That is why i think the fine is so high….YIKES!

  6. Yeah, I think they trying to send a message to people. It is ridiculous though. I agree with Kellie M. too. Cause what about when someone buys a CD and then burn a whole bunch of copies and hand or sell them out to people. If prices would come down on music maybe people wouldn’t be just taking the music. I don’t know. I mean, I don’t personally like to take it. I don’t even like buying it on itunes. I like to have the actual CD in my hand.

  7. They know half the people in this world including people they know download of limewire or bearshare cause they dont want to pay 0.99 cent but you dont gotta make the fine so high and not just for one person as an example CD’s are 13.99 and people out here in maryland seliing them in front of grocery stores. I tunes be cheating people all the time so whats left…… downloads which have some faults(virus) but people like you and me love music

  8. WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is excessive……….. She more than likely cant pay that, so that means jail time. This scare isn’t gonna stop piracy. Oh well Industry folks…………….. Simple economics and technology changes are at fault…… That damn computer and cheap ass people. But most consumers would purchase the songs and or albums they feel are warranted for purchase.

    The Truth is Record companies need to start picking better songs, and stop allowing artist to choose songs, producers, where they record or the look in which they think is best…… Having 1 or 2 songs on Ur album being up to par and 14 stupid ass no feeling other songs that don’t fit the album title or your image really suck. Artist also must humble themselves and over extend themselves to there fans; More radio shows, meet and greets, more community outreach. Making a positive out luck is so important today, take Ur grill out Ur mouth, cut Ur hair, put a suit on when needed. Being ignorant is just as bad as looking ignorant. You are role models now, This is why retailers say no to sponsorship of there merchandise, Ur image will destroy there Brand. Yes u have a demographic that will buy it, but why lose what they have already gained, these white businesses owners don’t want u Messing that up.

    There was a time when there would be 5 to 8 singles per album and those albums are worth going into the store and purchasing. Rihanna did it with this last album, Ushers “Confessions”, LiL wayne last album, And How did those albums do???????? They did Well right? There aren’t many albums since the start of the limewire, napster evolutions to do that well. Those 3 albums for example will go down for the record as classics. In conclusion Labels; Give consumers a reason to purchase Ur project (Same with Indie artist and Indie labels).

    Prior Napster days, artist lasted because of all those things. Think about Michael Jackson, Janet Jackson,Paula Abdul,Quincy Jones, Whitney, Mariah,TLC, ETC Check the numbers (Album Sales). Go on Wikipedia.org The stats are all there. Stop Being lazy Rappers, Singers and Record Execs. Use Ur brains and dare to be different from the current ringtone artist and Idiots. Last for more than a season and work for 30 more years.

    But back to the subject. This is crazy, maybe another punishment in needed. GOD bless her.

    =Charm

  9. I think the gov’t & the jury has lost their damn mind! I support artists 100% when it comes to buying their albums b/c they’ve put blood, sweat and tears in creating something special (if they’re a good artist it’s special). But downloading/file sharing is probably in the top 5 most common things people do on a daily basis. Tryin to make an example out of her is not going to solve anything in my opinion. I seriously doubt the courtrooms are going to stay full of these cases just to prove a point…for what. The only way to stop illegal file sharing (or minimize it) is to block/ban these filesharing hosts like Limewire.

    Matter of fact, why aren’t they making the companies that’s providing these programs to us? Do they not play a MAJOR part in this by providing the services in the first place. Sorry I’m talkin too much, but that fine is bullshit! And kikuchusss makes a good point above, what’s the difference in one person buying the album and sharing it with everyone they know? Ok i’ll stop here…..sorry I for this long msg lifers! Later

  10. That is mad dumb! Whether the government is tryna make an example, it is not going to make people stop downloading songs. Shit I know I won’t, times are hard nobody got money like that to buy CDs if we only like half of the songs on the cd. And plus ciruit city and virgin mega store are completely closed. I can hardly find a best buy in brooklyn and I don’t have time. That’s why I download and these entertainers (no offense) are already rich so it’s not that much of a problem.

  11. DANG..I guess its that serious.If she cant afford that then she got one hell of a debt bu I think the fine is unrealistic. If this the case half the U.S should be paying fines like this but maybe people smarter than her LOL. Seriously though she bout to be in debt maybe this the way of showing people this situation with copyright violation is really serious..Good Luck to her

  12. That’s dumb so now what happens to her? It’s not like she just has that type of money laying around, the record company makes money as it is with out trying to get her for 24 songs. All that stuff is a set up the sell you a ipod that can hold 30K songs on it but then charge .99 cents for each song. So they find her guilty then what its not like people are going to see her like the example, they are trying to make, and stop downloading. Who is the jury that even found her quilty because if any of them got kids a bet they “willful violation of the copyrights ” going on at their own houses.

  13. WOW!!!!! The RIAA are some Corporate Thugs. They are truly making an example out of her. I can see if the chick was like a (bootlegger) making a profit, but come on 24 songs. Do they think their actually going to get 1.92 millions from her? Now, I truly believe that people should be punished for illegally downloading music, because that is technically stealing and i feel that artist put alot in to what they do for someone to just get it for free. When I’m pretty sure they had to come out of pocket. But I think the the punishment that they are handing down to her is a bit harsh, they could of let her off with a warning first.. That’s Just My Two Cents……

  14. Sounds like she’s gonna have to get that second job!

  15. UH OH!

  16. suffer the consequence

    want to make weekly income, unlimited compensation, join this free automated referral program and did i say its free to join lol

  17. My problem is with the $80k per song. That number is presuming that “X” number of people will download the song and “X” number of folks will download from each of those people and so on and they multiply this fictional number by $.99 each. So they are essentially fining you for crimes that may not havehappened.They should not be allowed to fine a person for what other people do. They should have to track down and prosecute each person for $.99 per song.

  18. She should make a reality tv show, write a book, or sell the made-for-tv movie rights. I would recommend that she make a record, but there is no money in that.

  19. No matter how I feel she was wrong but i mean shit as a artist I’m glad cause then that’s more money in my pocket

  20. @charm:
    i feel the problem IS the record label and not the artists. labels are already picking out the songs and styles of the artist based on what they think is selling which causes the artist to sell out and conform to what the labels want which is to get a hit and recoup what they put out in the 1st place. labels don’t seem to want longevity and growth in an artist anymore and some artists are so hyped about the glitter and fame that they just want the money yesterday. this is why a&r’s and true artist development are such important commodities but that would mean more money to shell out and the labels rather cut out the middle man.

    as for the dloading/file sharing case, i co-sign with Mrggfep: you’re prosecuting someone on the POTENTIAL loss of income from the songs when in reality, you have no idea how much money the songs would have bought in from the jump. you’re also not considering nor can you determine how huge their fan base has become or how much money the artist has made based on the concert sales, actual albums purchased or paraphernalia (t-shirts, stickers, hats, buttons, etc) as a result of these songs being shared. the riaa and the mpaa want to make an example but they’re going after the wrong people and for the wrong cause. if you really want to light fire under someone’s ass then go after the people who work in mastering, go after the editors or their assistants in the movie industry, go after the distributors because those are the individuals who make it available to everyone else especially if they’re pissed off by someone in house. funny how they still haven’t figured out who was responsible for leaking “wolverine” but they want to go after anyone who dloaded it. it’s like walking into a smoke shop in the village: you can buy crack pipes, water bongs and weed pipes along with cigarettes and lighters legally but you can’t use the pipes and bongs for it’s actual purpose because that’s illegal?!

  21. here’s the long version of this story from ap. hope you don’t mind, jd:

    Jun 18, 9:08 PM EDT

    Jury rules against Minn. woman in download case

    MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A replay of the nation’s only file-sharing case to go to trial has ended with the same result – a Minnesota woman was found to have violated music copyrights and must pay huge damages to the recording industry.

    A federal jury ruled Thursday that Jammie Thomas-Rasset willfully violated the copyrights on 24 songs, and awarded recording companies $1.92 million, or $80,000 per song.

    Thomas-Rasset’s second trial actually turned out worse for her. When a different federal jury heard her case in 2007, it hit Thomas-Rasset with a $222,000 judgment.

    The new trial was ordered after the judge in the case decided he had erred in giving jury instructions.

    Thomas-Rasset sat glumly with her chin in hand as she heard the jury’s finding of willful infringement, which increased the potential penalty. She raised her eyebrows in surprise when the jury’s penalty of $80,000 per song was read.

    Outside the courtroom, she called the $1.92 million figure “kind of ridiculous” but expressed resignation over the decision.

    “There’s no way they’re ever going to get that,” said Thomas-Rasset, a 32-year-old mother of four from the central Minnesota city of Brainerd. “I’m a mom, limited means, so I’m not going to worry about it now.”

    Her attorney, Kiwi Camara, said he was surprised by the size of the judgment. He said it suggested that jurors didn’t believe Thomas-Rasset’s denials of illegal file-sharing, and that they were angry with her.

    Camara said he and his client hadn’t decided whether to appeal or pursue the Recording Industry Association of America’s settlement overtures.

    Cara Duckworth, a spokeswoman for the RIAA, said the industry remains willing to settle. She refused to name a figure, but acknowledged Thomas-Rasset had been given the chance to settle for $3,000 to $5,000 earlier in the case.

    “Since Day One we have been willing to settle this case and we remain willing to do so,” Duckworth said.

    In closing arguments earlier Thursday, attorneys for both sides disputed what the evidence showed.

    An attorney for the recording industry, Tim Reynolds, said the “greater weight of the evidence” showed that Thomas-Rasset was responsible for the illegal file-sharing that took place on her computer. He urged jurors to hold her accountable to deter others from a practice he said has significantly harmed the people who bring music to everyone.

    Defense attorney Joe Sibley said the music companies failed to prove allegations that Thomas-Rasset gave away songs by Gloria Estefan, Sheryl Crow, Green Day, Journey and others.

    “Only Jammie Thomas’s computer was linked to illegal file-sharing on Kazaa,” Sibley said. “They couldn’t put a face behind the computer.”

    Sibley urged jurors not to ruin Thomas-Rasset’s life with a debt she could never pay. Under federal law, the jury could have awarded up to $150,000 per song.

    U.S. District Judge Michael Davis, who heard the first lawsuit in 2007, ordered up a new trial after deciding he had erred in instructions to the jurors. The first time, he said the companies didn’t have to prove anyone downloaded the copyrighted songs she allegedly made available. Davis later concluded the law requires that actual distribution be shown.

    His jury instructions this time framed the issues somewhat differently. He didn’t explicitly define distribution but said the acts of downloading copyrighted sound recordings or distributing them to other users on peer-to-peer networks like Kazaa, without a license from the owners, are copyright violations.

    This case was the only one of more than 30,000 similar lawsuits to make it all the way to trial. The vast majority of people targeted by the music industry had settled for about $3,500 each. The recording industry has said it stopped filing such lawsuits last August and is instead now working with Internet service providers to fight the worst offenders.

    In testimony this week, Thomas-Rasset denied she shared any songs. On Wednesday, the self-described “huge music fan” raised the possibility for the first time in the long-running case that her children or ex-husband might have done it. The defense did not provide any evidence, though, that any of them had shared the files.

    The recording companies accused Thomas-Rasset of offering 1,700 songs on Kazaa as of February 2005, before the company became a legal music subscription service following a settlement with entertainment companies. For simplicity’s sake the music industry tried to prove only 24 infringements.

    Reynolds argued Thursday that the evidence clearly pointed to Thomas-Rasset as the person who made the songs available on Kazaa under the screen name “tereastarr.” It’s the same nickname she acknowledged having used for years for her e-mail and several other computer accounts, including her MySpace page.

    Reynolds said the copyright security company MediaSentry traced the files offered by “tereastarr” on Kazaa to Thomas-Rasset’s Internet Protocol address – the online equivalent of a street address – and to her modem.

    He said MediaSentry downloaded a sample of them from the shared directory on her computer. That’s an important point, given Davis’ new instructions to jurors.

    Although the plaintiffs weren’t able to prove that anyone but MediaSentry downloaded songs off her computer because Kazaa kept no such records, Reynolds told the jury it’s only logical that many users had downloaded songs offered through her computer because that’s what Kazaa was there for.

    Sibley argued it would have made no sense for Thomas-Rasset to use the name “tereastarr” to do anything illegal, given that she had used it widely for several years.

    He also portrayed the defendant as one of the few people brave enough to stand up to the recording industry, and he warned jurors that they could also find themselves accused on the basis of weak evidence if their computers are ever linked to illegal file-sharing.

    “They are going to come at you like they came at ‘tereastarr,'” he said.

    Steve Marks, executive vice president and general counsel of the Recording Industry Association of America, estimated earlier this week that only a few hundred of the lawsuits remain unresolved and that fewer than 10 defendants were actively fighting them.

    The companies that sued Thomas-Rasset are subsidiaries of all four major recording companies, Warner Music Group Corp., Vivendi SA’s Universal Music Group, EMI Group PLC and Sony Corp.’s Sony Music Entertainment.

    The recording industry has blamed online piracy for declines in music sales, although other factors include the rise of legal music sales online, which emphasize buying individual tracks rather than full albums.

  22. They should just find out how many other people downloaded that song and then make her pay for each song (0.99$) for every download made…so if 300 people downloaded 24 songs she would have to pay roughly $680….that’s the fair thing to do…they getting back the money they potentially lost

  23. remember when you used to record songs off the radio back in the day shit i used to have everything for free EPMD SLICK RICK N.W.A etc all they first shit i taped off the radio you didnt get whole albums but you had your shit. what im sayin is people have always gotten free music it is what it is! she aint got that shit anyway!

  24. Sickening, yet another example of the courts ruling in the favor of big business over the people, as always.

  25. WOW!!!!

  26. A LIFERS COME BY AND CHECK ME OUT !!!I DO THIS SHIT ON A SERIOUS LEVEL AND I WOULD APPRECIATE SOME FEED BACK IF YOU WILL. NEGATIVE OR POSITIVE!! JUST LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE THAT…NO HATERZ THOUGH!!!! WE DONT LIKE THOSE….LOL

  27. THATS F’D UP!

  28. @ peace and cheese
    I agree with you. I believe its also that. Being Cheap and cutting corners is very nuttz and I still don’t understand that. I am a artist developer and since Im pretty good at my job I stay pretty busy. LOL right? Much respect.

  29. YEA THAT SHIT IS WAY TOO MUCH THEY JUST WHAT TO MAKE AN EXAMPLE OUT OF HERE…BUT THEY CANT GET EVERYBODY LOL

  30. That’s some bullshit. They know who to go after and how. They know exactly how to stop that shit if they really wanted to. Limewire etc would be eliminated. Look at PirateBay. It’s all bullshit. She won’t be payin that.

  31. thats just crazy…

  32. That amount is outrageous and excessive. The industry was not hurt by her downloads like that. They get money from radio, venues, malls, and other places, so her downloads could not have hit them that hard. The court may be trying to make a example of her, but I feel that some major players may have had a influence on the court to make them come to such a excessive decision.

  33. GOOD morning to all LIFERS!!! i would really appreciate if i could get you all to come by my page and check me out. give me some honest feed back about the music. if the shit is wack say its WACK and if you feel its HOT say its HOT. and would appreciate ANY feedback at all what so ever….so come on by and check me out….out!

  34. Hey Lifers.

    I agree to a certain point with Charm the Producer.

    There are some in the music industry that need to take there audience more seriously. Having one good track on an LP isn’t good enough. (yes LPs – just dated myself).
    Also, just relying on one hit song doesn’t make you an artist.

    I’ve always loved buying cds, records, cassettes, etc. But now, I’ve got to weed through the crap to find something worth buying.

    If you play Michael Jackson’s Thriller right now, I bet anyone that had that album will know the words to almost every song on the album and there’s only 9 songs! It’s the best selling album for a reason….quality music.

    The business of music that appeared hidden in my day is now in the forefront and you see it with the amount of albums an artist will put out, the quality of the songs and the attutide of some the artist. I work very hard for my money and after many disappointing purchases, I have adopted the 4 song rule. If I don’t like at least 4 songs, then you don’t get my money.

    I understand making music is a business and she broke the law but there’s also a lot of greed out there and shows in a lot of the music out there. If the music business is so worried about their paper, make some changes…stop using the GM approach. Can’t keep producing crap for ever.

    The same goes for the movie and television industry….too much crap being forced on the consumer.

    Over saturation. You can only sell entertainment based on hype for so long.

  35. That’s crazy, People shouldn’t be using file-sharing, it’s trackable by your IP address. email me and i’ll show you how to get albums for free with out file-sharing. Most ablums come out are garbage , so why pay when all you want is one song.. Honestly I have bought an album in 6 years but i have everything that has come out since. No matter what the Industy does to try to stop bootleggers… IT WILL NEVER STOP!!

  36. That is bs. What about the site that allowed her to download these songs? The fine is excessive and she will never be able to pay it. The courts are trying to make an example out of her. And they are wrong. If they are gonna make example, start @ the top. What about the techs who work in recording studios and record companies who steal the music in order to put it on the internet? they should be taxed as well. I feel sorry for this woman. Damn shame.

  37. I THINK THAT SHIT IS CRAZY! I MEAN ITS BETTER FOR THE INDUSTRY IF SHIT LIKE THIS KEEPS HAPPENING AROUND THE WORLD BUT FOR THE LIFERS WE GOTTA REACH IN THE POCKETS IF WE WANT GOOD MUSIC NOW…….DEPENDING ON IF THIS ENFORCEMENT KEEPS SPREADING AND IF NIGGAS KEEP GETTING CAUGHT DOING DUMB SHIT!

  38. At the end of the day, I think the fine they gave her was outrages. There is no way on this earth she can pay that fine, second point I feel as though the government should treat the file-sharing situation like they deal with every other case that deals with the search of someones personal property. The cops can’t just walk up in your house and search your shit without having a warrant. It should be the same for Computers, the government should not be allowed to search anyones computer without the proper paperwork. To me, I feel them just checking someones computer without proper procedure is a violation to the right to privacy. Jd, please don’t respond back saying that the ppl downloading music is taking money out the artist mouth, because the way I see it is artist have been allowed for way too long to come out with one hot song, we the consumers go buy the album and the shyt is trash… So am i suppose to spend, 12 to 15 dollars for one song???? HELL NO….

  39. That’s a bit much the RIAA is only causing people to dislike them more. File sharing is here to stay whether they like it or not. I don’t mind buying music from Itunes if the music is quality, but most of it isn’t. A lot of the tracks I want are mixtapes or remixs and they are not offered on itunes. The music industry also has to look at themselves as the reason people aren’t buying records as much. They put out garbage and music that isn’t original anymore. Record label’s are also greedy all songs on itunes use to be $0.99 now the are up to $1.29 who know’s how much they will be six months from now.

  40. I THINK ITS RIGHT BUT WHAT IF SHE’S NOT ABLE TO ALL THAT DAMN MONEY BACK. THAT’S WHERE THE PROBLEMS COME IN TO PLACE, BUT HEY WHAT CAN U SAY SHE JUST LIKE MUSIC LIKE THE REST OF US AND SHE JUST HAPPEN TO GET HERS FOR FREE. THIS BETTER HAD BEEN SOME ARTIST OR GROUPS THAT WAS THE SHIT FOR HER TO HAVE TO PAY ALL THAT MONEY BACK.

  41. Look…JD, im that cat you looking to sign. im already ready to go, ma music speaks for itself…come check me out!!!! yall be doin it real heavy out there in vegas though might i add… nah but real talk i belong over there… come check me!!

  42. That aint nothin but fine feathered fuckery! the government and the music industry is on some ancient shit! Thats what the fuck we do in the ’09 and for many many more years to come and record labels need to stop fuckin cryin about the shit and find away to flip it and stop targeting broke as common folks they know aint ever gonna be able to pay them damn near 2 mil…INDUSTRY STEP THAT STONE AGE ASS GAME UP AND GET ON FUCKIN BOARD!

  43. They are making an example out of her. We are likely to see more cases like this in the future. I know students who have to pay the RIAA 3-5K back for file sharing and downloading illegally. Watch out for those who are at universities and college because they have teamed with the recording industries to crack down on illegal file sharing.

  44. Damn thats crazy, i know i got a hell alot of songs that i got from limewire, but keep that on the L.O lifers…lol

  45. That is a bit excessive, but I think this problem needs to be cut off at the source. People will only download what’s available to them. Record companies need to come up with more secure ways to make and distribute music privately before it’s available to the public. More often than not, these ‘leaks’ come from someone in the artists’ camp or someone who has been sent music for review. Not only do I run a music blog, Sound-Savvy, but I’m also an IT Professional. There are ways to encrypt files when you’re sending them via email so as to prevent these leaks to the public, or at least narrow down the channels by which the music is getting out. Think about it, there are only so many piraters you can catch. Think smart, instead of persecuting others, PROTECT YOURSELF! Holla at me if you need more information on file encryption programs for your artists and their music JD!

  46. I saw this the day she was sentenced, and she can’t pay that. She said they won’t ever get there money because she is a low income single mother. On one hand is good that companies took a stand I guess, but what people don’t realize is with technology nowadays, this won’t stop peole and even if this never exisisted, people won’t just start buying CD’s again or purchasing off of Itunes. Have you seen the economy. People love music. But they loved it when tape decks with that little record button was popular also. We will be back to recording videos and the radio lol. Or get the deal where you get 3 or 4 songs free a month. I haven’t liked more than that many songs at one time in a very long while anyway.

  47. Man in Minnesota they been cracking down on downloading for about a few years now. Now like everyone in school is even scared to download mixtapes and shit. we had an assembly about it at school. This shit is crazy

  48. “albums” are dead. Artists will no longer be saturating the market with full albums in the near future. Longevity means putting out a couple of hit singles a year and staying in the game. The industry has to reinvent itself!! If you download a song, support the artist!!!! Buy a ticket to their show, buy a t-shirt. This problem will never go away. Period!

  49. i always remember the music of Gloria Estefan and the Miami Sound Machine. great music!.;-;

  50. Gloria Estefan and the Miami Sound Machine are really great, i love their music on the old days.~*:

  51. i really miss the 80s music with Gloria Estefan and the Miami Sound Machine”*’

Leave a Reply