RIAA wins file sharing case

Discussion in 'Mindless Banter' started by Jon, Oct 5, 2007.

  1. Jon

    Jon Well-Known Member

    1,352
    115
    63
  2. Lyn

    Lyn 2nd String Bench Warmer

    5
    670
    78
    Someone once told me that it's harder to catch Limewire users who download from a Mac. Is that true?
     
  3. Jon

    Jon Well-Known Member

    1,352
    115
    63
    Not true.

    It doesn't matter what your platform or OS is - they track you by your IP address. So use Limewire from your neighbor's house or a free access point like McDonalds :naughty:
     
  4. KaPow

    KaPow Senior Member

    1,369
    83
    48
    the page is gone :shrug:
     
  5. Jon

    Jon Well-Known Member

    1,352
    115
    63
  6. Steve

    Steve Whatever

    6,773
    234
    63
    Ouch, that would suck!
     
  7. magdalynaa

    magdalynaa Jabber Jaws

    4,267
    266
    83
  8. Steve

    Steve Whatever

    6,773
    234
    63
    Have any of you ever used bit torrent?
     
  9. moniseni

    moniseni Member

    108
    4
    18
    I know of people who use it...it works fairly well.
     
  10. Iron Will

    Iron Will Because I'm Awesome Thats Why.

    2,348
    211
    63
    oh noes!
     
  11. Gary

    Gary Well-Known Member

    4,878
    218
    63
    All the time.
     
  12. Mols

    Mols My BFF

    4,418
    234
    63
    This is where I live, I saw this lady comin outta the courtroom yesterday....big wake up call for lots of people. On the front page of the paper today and on the news.....
     
  13. Lyn

    Lyn 2nd String Bench Warmer

    5
    670
    78
    Yeah, they got a bunch of students from the Univ. of Tenn. last semester. One girl ended up settling out of court and had to pay back almost $10K.
     
  14. moniseni

    moniseni Member

    108
    4
    18
    I wonder how they come up with these numbers......its a bit extreme but maybe I will stop downloading from the major sites.
     
  15. magdalynaa

    magdalynaa Jabber Jaws

    4,267
    266
    83
    Limewire has more viruses than your local streetwalker. :uhuh:
     
  16. Steve

    Steve Whatever

    6,773
    234
    63
    Me too, doesn't it work differently than most of these other P2P networks? I heard something once and can't remember what it was.
     
  17. Patricia

    Patricia Well-Known Member

    5,855
    369
    83
    :lol:
    You're right about that. :dry:
     
  18. Lyn

    Lyn 2nd String Bench Warmer

    5
    670
    78
    How do they target people? Is it random or is it by the number of songs that you've downloaded? :scratch:
     
  19. Aaron_F

    Aaron_F A Grade Asshat

    1,818
    139
    63
    they ping uploaders,

    leechers ftw
     
  20. Mols

    Mols My BFF

    4,418
    234
    63
    In our paper today:

    Thomas says she’s not looking for help in paying $222,000
    Associated Press
    Published Saturday, October 06, 2007


    Jammie Thomas makes $36,000 a year but says she’s not looking for a handout to pay a $222,000 judgment after a jury in Duluth decided she illegally shared music online and did it on purpose.

    “I’m not going to ask for financial help,” the Brainerd woman told the Associated Press on Friday. But she added: “If it comes, I’m not going to turn it down, either.”

    Record labels have sued more than 26,000 people they accuse of sharing music online in violation of copyright laws.

    Thomas was the first person to fight back all the way to a trial. Six major record companies accused Thomas of offering 1,702 songs on the Kazaa file-sharing network. The trial focused on 24 songs. On Thursday in Duluth, jurors decided that Thomas willfully violated the copyright on all 24 and recommended she pay damages of $9,250 per song, or $222,000.

    Thomas has denied that the Kazaa account was hers.

    She said people have been leaving messages on her MySpace page offering to help.

    “I guess it’s my Native pride,” said Thomas, who is a member of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe. “Up until this point, I have not held my hand out and asked for financial assistance from anyone.”

    Thomas, 30, works for the Mille Lacs band coordinating a federal grant for cleaning up contaminated land. She said she doesn’t have the means to pay the damages.

    “I am a single mother of two boys. I make $36,000 a year at my job,” she said. “At best they could try and get a court order garnishing my wages.”

    Her attorney, Brian Toder, said that copyright law automatically awards court costs and attorney fees to the winning party. Paying those, too, could push the total judgment against Thomas as high as a half-million dollars.

    The lawsuits were brought by individual record companies and coordinated by the Recording Industry Association of America, where spokeswoman Cara Duckworth declined to comment Friday on the group’s plans for enforcing the judgment.

    Thomas questioned whether the record companies will be able to enforce the verdict because she is an enrolled member of the Mille Lacs band, lives on its land and works for the band.

    But Kevin Washburn, who teaches American Indian Law as a visiting associate professor at Harvard Law School, said tribal courts generally enforce judgments from other courts. And since this is a federal verdict, the tribal courts might not have a say in enforcing the verdict.

    “One way or another she’s got to pay,” he said.

    The recording industry won two victories with the $222,000 verdict. One was the money. But the other was convincing a judge and jurors that simply making songs available online, without proving they went anywhere, is copyright infringement.

    On Wednesday night, U.S. District Court Judge Michael Davis was planning to instruct jurors that record companies would have to prove someone copied the songs to find copyright infringement. But record company attorney Richard Gabriel cited cases where simply making songs available was found to be infringement, even without proving that they were copied.

    Legal experts said the question is not settled.

    Copyright law doesn’t come right out and say that making something available on a file-sharing network violates the copyright, said Andrew Bridges, an attorney who has argued that viewpoint for the Computer & Communications Industry Association.

    “Record labels don’t like that because it’s harder to prove,” he said.

    However, intellectual property treaties signed by the U.S. assume that simply making a work of art available can violate the copyright, said Jane C. Ginsburg, professor of literary and artistic property law at Columbia Law School.

    “It would be hard to see how we could be living up to our international obligations if the law were interpreted differently,” she said.
     

Share This Page