RIAA/Capitol vs. Jammie Thomas-Rasset: $2 mil. P2P damages!

It is entirely fair and

It is entirely fair and warranted. I know the freetards would have you believe nothing should ever cost anything with regard to entertainment.

Of course she will never pay it, but it doesn't change the fact she was guilty and should be held to the law. The law, as written, not some revisionist "songs now cost .99 cents" math.

The law is there, if you don't like it, lobby to have it changed. In the meantime follow it.

Tech guys have great designs and can do some amazing things, but have to come to the realization that "disruptive" technologies affect people's lives and businesses. You can't just come in and say "well this is how it SHOULD be done from now on". F off. The EFF and other organizations are putting out quasi-legal arguments and a lot of fuzzy thinking to justify this crap. They are funded by tech companies who have greatly gained from the theft of content to drive sales of devices (look at the stocks of WB and Apple for proof of this).

The music business was slow to react to the new tech, not out of ignorace, but because the new business method was not as lucrative. Think about that in ANY other industry, especially your own. Would you adopt new methods that make you less money in the hopes that it would stop theft?

Absolutely Ridiculous!!!

Well, there's another reason to required I.Q. tests for jurors...

Craziness

They definitely made an example out of her. Yes, what she did was wrong, but $2 Mil?

BOYCOTT RIAA -- Don't by CDs

http://riaasucks.com/what-you-can-do/

Source:
http://riaasucks.com/companies-supporting-riaa/

RIAA gets paid by record labels. Record labels get paid by us, the consumer who buys CD’s.

The music indusry in US is organized into Five major labels - RIAA (Sony, EMI, UMG, Time Warner, & BMG) - Recording Industry Association of America - control over 90% of the music distributes all over USA.

Here’s a list of record companies that support RIAA:

- Time Warner
- Sony
- EMI
- UMG
- BMG

ISP’s Supporting RIAA:

- AT&T
- Comcast
- Cox

These are the companies that help pay the RIAA lawyers and employees.

Jammie Thomas-Rasset

This is another ridiculous and frivolous lawsuit by the RIAA, (Repressive, Idiotic, Antiquated Asswipes) upon a Joesaphene average. They can’t get Kazza so they sue a single mum? The only message that is sending to the market is one which holds its clients, the record buying public in contempt. This will actually have the opposite effect as it has been proven that a non confrontational, co-operative incentive based model will work.

The way we consume and purchase music, for better or worse is changing as people are moving their music collections to a server type app like Itunes on a dedicated PC synced to an Ipod. Sony is a sinking ship; remember when they owned the personal portable music market with the Walkman? Apple stole the market from them by being open source and giving Itunes away for free linked to a store and eventually flooding the market with Ipods at multiple price points. This is while the Sony dickheads were figuring out ways to charge you for the music application, a proprietary compression algorithm, the hardware plus the music with a licensing fee. Then lets not forget there DRM debacle and putting spybot phone home malware in their CD's only to be caught red handed by a high level Microsoft development contractor testing software who happened to put a recently purchased CD in his drive and noticed something strange.

If Sony BMG and the RIAA spent all the money they have wasted in litigation in the last 10 years on delivering better ways of distributing music and got on board with Apple, the industry would be stronger and better for it. The Kazza's and alike would exist but the percentage split would be the opposite (90% legit and 10% illegal). If a song was 10 cents they would have made billions by now with a very small percentage of lost revenue. People like myself look at this and say to these fucking dinosaurs, well if you actually invested in new talent, artist development, created a realistic pricing structure and stopped fucking with artists and movie makers artistic license , I would sympathize with your cause. What is wrong with this picture? Desperate corporate entity with streams of litigation lawyers on 1000 clams an hour picking the life from the dying rotting corpse of extinct irrelevant toothless beast. "I know" says the clueless opportunistic succubus lawyer hanging like a parasite off the purse strings of the record companies shareholders,"we cant get Kazza, ISP's or anyone of note so we will sue that penniless mother in Michegan that will show em".

I urge people to have a look at the Trent Reznor interview (http://revision3.com/diggdialogg/trentreznor) posted on Revision3 to see how intelligent, forward thinking people adapt their business model to a changing market and not hang on to an outdated model of the tyranny of the past. Bring on the new guard, line each pony tailed, stone washed wearing major executive dinosaur up against the wall for audio execution. Bring on the Modular's and Twisted's of this world small boutique companies that are relevant and in touch with their clients..

I did have this conversation with a swinging dick for a major some three years ago and warned him that this course of action was fought with danger and would inevitably alienate them from their audience and have the opposite effect. His only interest at the time was playing hardball with Apple over 3 bucks a song. I told him at the time Apple don't need you and every week you are not on I tunes its costing you millions in revenue lost to other companies and file sharing. He said its very complicated, I disagreed and maintained that it is very simple adapt or die. The landscape is changing "your business model better change" as I know how the net works and where the future lies. Sooner or later your artists will revolt as they have a good case to terminate their contracts and look for another deal. "You are a technology company rite"? "Yeah", Well I put it to you that there is no greater impending train wreck heralding the death and destruction of your company than not rapidly adapting to the new digital economy on consumers terms. Guess what? I'm not Nostradamus but I was rite.

The record companies are trying to be the sheriffs in a largely lawless town which is stupidity. It all stems from losing control of the game and not accepting that people are getting sick of being ripped off and being controlled. Its now a case of the consumer telling the record company what is cool, when and how they want it and not the other way round. They have to take less money for the back catalog that is just pure economics. You buy a ten year old anything it is worth 1/3 for its value from new, so the new version of old is devalued simple economics. How can a company charge as much for a premium product as it does for an inferior product? Sure there are exceptions. classics, circumstantial variables to the marketing model but that only applies to at most 10%. I am an artist I want my royalties and want to maintain control of my catalog but I have to be realistic as a futurist in the post digital age.

As far as I am concerned, they can all die a slow horrible death trying to ring the last dying cent out of Phil Collins greatest hits volume 47, they deserve it.

Good luck trying to collect the money off this woman. It would seem like some modern day martyr she is being crucified for the sins of a consumer oppression rebellion caused by the record companies own actions.
Her only crime in my opinion judging by the list is having extremely bad taste in music.

The RIAA literally owns Jammie Thomas-Rasset

A jury of Jammie Thomas-Rasset's peers just levied a $1,920,000 fine against the young mother of 4 for sharing 24 songs on Kazaa.

The defendant, and others, are basically saying... "Good luck collecting it... you can't get blood from a turnip."

They (the RIAA) don't have to collect it. That wasn't the point. They made an example by publicly "executing" her.

The RIAA just showed every "tweenie," teen, pirate and casual illegal downloader in the country that they will subpoena every IP address, data record, ISP account and bank statement available to build a federal case against any and all individuals, no matter how "small" and "off-the-radar" they are.

This was the legal equivalent of a town-square public-hanging.

Let's break this down point for point...

A. This wasn't about money for the RIAA. It wasn't about settlements, dollars, statutory damages pursuant 17 USC 504 or recovering anything for the industry. It was about sending a cold, clear message to everyone who thinks that "Pirate Bay Rules!" and that they can download anything they want, because they'll "never get caught."

B. It was the defense's tactics that caused the RIAA to make this issue so public. My group hears the "it really wasn't me at my computer" defense, everyday. That doesn't fly, and the RIAA found a very, very public forum to prove this to the world.

C. The "What is Kazaa? What is Internet? What is keyboard? I love lamp." defense. Garbage.

D. "There will be another trial... She'll keep fighting... bla bla bla..." Why? She's lost twice. She pirated music. The first time, a jury of her peers said she owed $220,000. This time a jury of her peers said that she owed $1.9 Million. The next trial, they'll probably make her wear a "scarlet circle-C."

I don't understand what anti-RIAA proponents are waiting for... God? The Copyright-Fairy? ...To part the clouds and say "It's OK, my children, to steal all the music, movies and software you want... go forth... steal everything... live long and prosper...Go Pirate Bay!...Go Packers!..." Really? I mean... Really?

It's... not... going... to... happen.

Pirate Bay guys - jailed
Kazaa Girl - lost two trials and is now owned by RIAA
ISP's - strong-armed into bending to the RIAA's will

More fun stuff...

This judgment will follow her forever. Recent court rulings (known as "case law") have clearly established that willful copyright infringement is nondischargeable in bankruptcy. Which means, anytime she gets a paycheck, alimony payment or birthday-card from grandma... the RIAA will be there to garnish it. A $1,920,000 judgment will appear on her credit for the rest of her life. Which means... no car loan... no house loan... and probably no job above that of "burger flipper."

Let me be perfectly clear... the RIAA literally, and legally owns Ms. Thomas-Rasset.

As for the statement, "You can't squeeze blood from a turnip." True. But you can publicly crush it.

G.C. Hutson
Sadien, Inc.
http://www.sadien.com
http://www.sadien.com/about

For the record... I am not pro-RIAA, pro-BSA, pro-SIIA, pro-Hollywood nor pro-Big-Software. I believe in (and love) the law. Specifically, copyright law. It's my job. It's my life.

I work, everyday, to help people and companies avoid problems, just like the one Ms. Thomas-Rasset is now facing. The first step is education on what copyright is, and how it works.

Copyright is extremely complex, and very complicated.

Rule 1: If you wait until someone is "knocking on your door" to start worrying about copyright, music files, software licenses, etc... it is too late.

(This comment contains subjective opinion, and is an editorial)