Friday, October 5th 2007

Woman Fined $222,000 for Music Sharing

Jammie Thomas, a single mother from Minnesota, has been ordered to pay $222,000 in damages after being found guilty of illegally sharing music over the internet. Thomas was found to have shared over 1,700 files via Kazaa under the username Tereastarr, of which 24 were named in court. As a result she was ordered to pay $9,250 for each of the 24 songs, which totalled to $222,000. Thomas’ defence attorney argued that there was no proof she was behind the keyboard sharing the songs, and forensic scientists were unable to find any evidence on her hard drive because it has been recently replaced. However, based on the fact that Thomas used the nickname Tereastarr for a number of internet services and that the sharing had been traced to her modem’s MAC address the jury found her guilty of the charges. At the end of the case RIAA attorney Richard Gabriels said “This is what can happen if you don’t settle.”Source: DailyTech
Add your own comment

51 Comments on Woman Fined $222,000 for Music Sharing

#1
keakar
gee $11,000 a song no wonder music people are so rich, whats a whole cd run you $100,000 ? freakin idiots!
Posted on Reply
#2
XooM
actually, its $9,125 a song (i think)

Also, illegal search and siezure without a warrant or consent FTW! Who needs police when we have private groups willing to break and enter and read all your crap and look through your stuff like the RIAA?

Rights are for free countries, not Amerika!
Posted on Reply
#3
keakar
by: XooM
actually, its $9,125 a song (i think)

Also, illegal search and siezure without a warrant or consent FTW! Who needs police when we have private groups willing to break and enter and read all your crap and look through your stuff like the RIAA?

Rights are for free countries, not Amerika!
oh ok, not had my coffee yet lol.

i swear this is just wrong because they go after those who cant fight back. they shouldnt be able to sue individuals only websites like Kazaa because they are the enabler. i dont think this was fair to limit what a person can freely give to others, its not like she made money from it.
Posted on Reply
#4
LiNKiN
Staff
Well, file sharing of copyrighted material IS illegal you know. If you don't want to do the time, don't do the crime! It could be worse....in olden days maybe they would have just skipped the fining and went straight to the executing, or de-limbing. :p
Posted on Reply
#5
sinner33
Well if she knew she did it, I say she had it coming. :cool:
Posted on Reply
#6
DRDNA
by: XooM
actually, its $9,125 a song (i think)

Also, illegal search and siezure without a warrant or consent FTW! Who needs police when we have private groups willing to break and enter and read all your crap and look through your stuff like the RIAA?

Rights are for free countries, not Amerika!
LOL heres a secret>>> The RIAA is being investigated by the CIA and another group of feds cant remember which one ...but they will soon have there hands full for breaking many privacy laws and the such as are thier tactics....lol they will pay way more than their victims.
Posted on Reply
#7
LiNKiN
Staff
by: keakar
oh ok, not had my coffee yet lol.

i swear this is just wrong because they go after those who cant fight back. they shouldnt be able to sue individuals only websites like Kazaa because they are the enabler. i dont think this was fair to limit what a person can freely give to others, its not like she made money from it.
There is an argument to this. I have the right to own a firearm, however the manufacturer isn't liable if I go and break the law with it.
Posted on Reply
#8
keakar
by: LiNKiN
There is an argument to this. I have the right to own a firearm, however the manufacturer isn't liable if I go and break the law with it.
this is no different than someone buying a pack of cigerettes, you ask for one and he gives it to you, he goes to jail for it because he stopped you from having to buy your own pack!

the only difference is the record companies paid off the politicians to call free will a crime.

anything i own i can freely give and nothing i buy i do not own no matter what a crooked politician says. the arguement that i cant resell the song on the cd i buy makes sense and protects intelectual properties but to extend that to say i cant freely share it for free is crazy. but the law is the law and we must live with it.

they are not going about it the right way, they should make the internet illegal unless you have a goverment santioned website that is licensed and regulated for only goverment approved content. that would solve the problem once and for all, we should have that in about 10 years at the rate things are going.
Posted on Reply
#9
jtleon
Can anyone say APPEALS COURT!!!

This judgement is ridiculous, and the Judge and attorneys are clearly in the pocket of the RIAA. If you were an attorney, who would you want to win? A broke housewife, who could not possibly fund your next Yacht endeavor?!? Why on earth would RIAA ever hire you again for their next dozen court cases?

Clearly this case has to go to higher courts - even the US Supreme Court - to eliminate the money games!!!

Regards,
jtleon
Posted on Reply
#10
DRDNA
by: jtleon
Can anyone say APPEALS COURT!!!

This judgement is ridiculous, and the Judge and attorneys are clearly in the pocket of the RIAA. If you were an attorney, who would you want to win? A broke housewife, who could not possibly fund your next Yacht endeavor?!? Why on earth would RIAA ever hire you again for their next dozen court cases?

Clearly this case has to go to higher courts - even the US Supreme Court - to eliminate the money games!!!

Regards,
jtleon
the judges and DA's are part of the same investigation.
Posted on Reply
#11
Morgoth
lol 1,700 filles i have more then that on music
Posted on Reply
#12
jtleon
by: DRDNA
the judges and DA's are part of the same investigation.
Thats is almost reassuring - however the Investigators are no doubt members of the same BAR association - a self protecting entity that only sacrifices those that rebel against their own crede. There is no true justice - unless you become your own attorney - its not that difficult and all children should learn the basics throughout their primary and secondary education. (Why do you think Congress controls Public Education!?!?)

The U.S. will ultimately crumble thanks to the apathy of its citizens!!!

Regards,
jtleon
Posted on Reply
#13
Weer
This is rich.
Punish one single-mother for everyone's crime.

America is not free anymore, and I'm glad I don't live there.
Posted on Reply
#14
lemonadesoda
I think it is right the lady was prosecuted... and also that she was found guilty (if she was guilty). However, the size of the fine is insane, and just goes to show the power of commercial lobby groups that are protecting the interests of media companies and ready to destroy private lives in the pursuit of profit.

For me, the correct fine would be:

1./ linked to the persons net worth or income. the size of that fine is going to bankrupt her and mean she, and her kids, are going to have a pretty shit life
2./ similar, and certainly not more, than the fines given to a pirate radio station for 23 songs = 2 hrs, of radio play, or
3./ similar to the fees that a national radio station must pay as royalties for playing 23 songs on the radio waves

There are people who get fined peanuts for, what I consider, to be much greater crimes than this: political embezzlement, "true" theft, corporate corruption, share option scams (e.g. Apple), companies not paying their RIAA fees, etc.

While I DO NOT THINK she should get away with it, the punishment is insane, and makes me lose a lot of respect for the people involved in serving this punishment on her.

USA has a habit of over doing things do people it doesnt like (both corporate and political). Shame.
Posted on Reply
#15
mdm-adph
by: lemonadesoda
I think it is right the lady was prosecuted... and also that she was found guilty (if she was guilty). However, the size of the fine is insane, and just goes to show the power of commercial lobby groups that are protecting the interests of media companies and ready to destroy private lives in the pursuit of profit.

For me, the correct fine would be:

1./ linked to the persons net worth or income. the size of that fine is going to bankrupt her and mean she, and her kids, are going to have a pretty shit life
2./ similar, and certainly not more, than the fines given to a pirate radio station for 23 songs = 2 hrs, of radio play, or
3./ similar to the fees that a national radio station must pay as royalties for playing 23 songs on the radio waves

There are people who get fined peanuts for, what I consider, to be much greater crimes than this: political embezzlement, "true" theft, corporate corruption, share option scams (e.g. Apple), companies not paying their RIAA fees, etc.

While I DO NOT THINK she should get away with it, the punishment is insane, and makes me lose a lot of respect for the people involved in serving this punishment on her.

USA has a habit of over doing things do people it doesnt like (both corporate and political). Shame.
Wouldn't work in America -- different levels of fines based upon income goes against "all men being equal" and all that.

Okay, bullshit, I know -- basically, the rich make the laws. Why would they want to increase their own fines? :p
Posted on Reply
#16
joinmeindeath417
i think its a set up and basically there just using this as bait to make people think it's true, the media can push anything on anyone..obviously this news headline will scare people into not using p2p programs etc. This is completely unjustifiable

They presented NO warrant to invade her computer that is invasion of privacy hell you can prevent a cop from looking at anything of yours until he or she shows you a warrant. SO that could definitely be fought.

It's not that she "didn't know" this could happen but more so that it shouldn't have happened like that..wheres the warning or anything like that...i think its a set up honestly it doesn't really make any sense look how many cases the RIAA have lost..they are desperate to try anything so why not set up a hoax to scare people? it makes perfect sense ...if you cant win...lie to win...
Posted on Reply
#17
Casheti
That's a crazy high fine, stupid if you ask me. How is a single mother ever expected to pay that? Do they even THINK of these things? And did they consider the psychological effects this would have on her children? I've been in situations not too different from this and it messes you up as a kid.

But I don't know how this would have turned out in the UK so I can't comment on different countries being nutcases.
Posted on Reply
#18
jydie
Honestly, she could have shared them without knowing it... her kids could have installed Kazaa (a lot of the people using kazaa are kids). She could own the CD's and simply have ripped them to her hard drive so that she could listen to them from her playlist. I think Kazaa searches for files when it is installed, and tries to set itself up so that it starts up with windows....... so, she could have been doing simple web browsing or word processing while Kazaa was allowing others members to download her legit MP3s.

I also agree that those fines are way to high. What a joke. I guess all those kids that burn a copy of a music CD for their friends are going to be doomed for life once they are caught. :wtf:
Posted on Reply
#19
Casheti
Yea Limewire does the same, I never even knew I was hosting files until I looked at the search monitor and people were taking my stuff, I was like wtf piss off.

I don't really use it anymore.

I don't think any of the agents or judges or whatever can honestly say that they or any of their relatives have never used or viewed pirated media before.
Posted on Reply
#20
Ser-J
Wow, that is messed up:shadedshu, and she lives in Minnesota.............
Posted on Reply
#21
Casheti
What does living there have to do with anything?
Posted on Reply
#22
LiNKiN
Staff
I think he's referring that she lives nearby. ;)
Posted on Reply
#23
keakar
by: Morgoth
lol 1,700 filles i have more then that on music
read it again, she had 1700 songs on her computer but only found guilty of sharing 24 songs!
Posted on Reply
#24
Schmuv
keakar is right.
9250 * 24 = 222.000$

If she was found guilty of downloading 1700 songs it would've been:
9250 * 1700 = 15.250.000$
Posted on Reply
#25
keakar
by: jydie
Honestly, she could have shared them without knowing it... her kids could have installed Kazaa (a lot of the people using kazaa are kids). She could own the CD's and simply have ripped them to her hard drive so that she could listen to them from her playlist. I think Kazaa searches for files when it is installed, and tries to set itself up so that it starts up with windows....... so, she could have been doing simple web browsing or word processing while Kazaa was allowing others members to download her legit MP3s.

I also agree that those fines are way to high. What a joke. I guess all those kids that burn a copy of a music CD for their friends are going to be doomed for life once they are caught. :wtf:
well i believe they clearly showed she was uploading them and not just unknowingly sharing files that she downloaded. i dont think she was wrongly convicted but i think convicting her was wrong. even worse is the size of the fine!

if me or you won a case against the record companies for overpricing cds we would be limited to only collect the amount of loss, peanuts! the amount of loss they are allowing to be claimed here is out of line because they are treating her as though she was selling her own cds. in effect $1 for every person who downloaded her song.

this says loud and clear to anyone who shares files on the internet you "are" breaking the law but jaywalkers are not put in jail and file sharers should not be saddled with lifelong debt that ruins families. the wife and kids of some idiot sharing files shouldnt have their future ruined by it.

JMHO
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment