Court orders Jammie Thomas to pay RIAA $1.92 million

by Yizuman 6 Replies latest social entertainment

  • Yizuman

    ammie Thomas-Rasset was found guilty of willful copyright infringement on Thursday in a Minneapolis federal court and must pay the recording industry $1.92 million.

    In a surprise decision, the jury imposed damages against Thomas-Rasset, who was originally accused to sharing more than 1,700 songs, at a whopping $80,000 for each of the 24 songs she was ultimately found guilty of illegally sharing..

    In 2007, the Recording Industry Association of America claimed in a lawsuit that Thomas-Rasset pilfered 1,700 songs. The RIAA eventually culled that number down to a representative sample of 24.

    Thomas-Rasset lost a previous trial in October 2007 when a jury rendered a $222,000 verdict against the Minnesota native. U.S. District Judge Michael David threw out the decision after acknowledging he erred when giving his jury instructions.

    According to Ars Technica reporter Nate Anderson, Thomas-Rasset gasped when the dollar amount was read in court.

    For the four largest recording companies, the jury's decision is an affirmation of the legality of the industry's copyright claims.

    "We appreciate the jury's service and that they take this issue as seriously as we do," said Cara Duckworth, an RIAA spokeswoman. "We are pleased that the jury agreed with the evidence and found the defendant liable. Since day 1, we have been willing to settle the case and remain willing to do so."

    According to Ben Sheffner, a copyright advocate and former attorney for 20th Century Fox who attended the entire hearing, one of Thomas' attorneys is willing to discuss a settlement with the music industry.

    Ouch! I wonder if she can appeal that.

    I hate the RIAA, they suck!


  • leavingwt

    This is absurd.

    She could have been paying $10 to $15 per month for an unlimited music subscription service.

    How the RIAA could fine her more than the cost of a music subscription, is beyond me.

    As long as companies treat their customers as criminals, people will not respect their "intellectual property".

  • Yizuman

    As long as companies treat their customers as criminals, people will not respect their "intellectual property".

    I agree.

    Lars Ulrich from Metallica pissed off millions of fans when he went after Napster and said that those millions of downloaders are wankers and thieves and doesn't want them as fans. So he basically bit the hands that feeds him.

    RIAA went after a dead grandma, a 12 year old and a family that does not have a computer nor internet access, but wants their money anway. They're just a bunch of greedy turds who don't give a damn who's lives they destroy as long as they get their money.

    What makes me even sicker is that RIAA lobbies with Congress with of course, money, in order to get them to pass bills that favors them. You can change or create laws by "donating" money to Congress and they'll pass them as a "thank you". While screwing over billions of music lovers who happens to be voters.

    I'm boycotting RIAA by avoiding any CDs that is RIAA supported.

    Bands like Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails have dropped RIAA and is recording their own music, putting them up for free online at their websites. They're counting on the fans to buy their concert tickets as a result of going digital. Unlike Metallica, he has his own website, but charges for his music and RIAA collects a fee. Radiohead and NiN does not pay any RIAA fees.

    Interesting enough, RIAA had been considering suing them for putting up their past music albums online for free because at the time, they were RIAA supported.

    There are alot of good bands that is non-RIAA supported, here's a list of them.

    There's a couple of sites that you can take a look at... and


  • Leolaia

    Things are changing in the business; more artists are reaching beyond recording monoliths like the RIAA to produce their music. One of my favorite bands is Metric and they self-financed and self-marketed their new album which came out in March. Here is what one blog says about them:

    I recently came across another success story about a 5-year old band called "Metric". They recently self-financed their 5th CD. This time, they did so without a label, and their music is doing pretty well, in fact it's placing in the upper #30s of pop/rock sales, according to Nielsen.

    The band manager had this to say:
    "Talking gross numbers that come directly to the band, we have made more money already than we have on the last record in four years," said Mathieu Drouin, the band's co-manager. "Without any intermediary, we're making 77 cents on the dollar for every record we sell" on iTunes. Under a label deal... Metric would have earned closer to 22 cents on the dollar

    I purchased the CD directly from the band, and the purchase also gave me the right to download a full MP3 album (320 kbps). I received the CD in the mail, and it was very well produced, and it felt pretty good that the band was getting more money directly by doing it this way. And I see the album well-stocked at music stores like Rasputin's. It was a learning experience for them and there were a few snafus along the way, but I hope more and more musicians follow a similar path and get more of what by all rights should be coming to them.

    Another blog about the story:

  • Yizuman

    I see Cheap Trick is developing their own RIAA-free albums. Good for them!

    The list is from a search result on Classic Rock, which is what I prefer, but you can look at the list on your favorite music prefs.

    The result will show ya which has a warning that it is RIAA supported and what is not.


  • Markfromcali

    I guess it's down to $1.5 mil now from that article last Thursday? Anyway just an occasion to post this:

  • Satanus

    Riaa doesn't expect her to pay 1.9 mil. She may pay something. It's about winning a battle so they can use it as a precedent to win the war, and keep control of their hostage members and their songs.


Share this