Radiohead Looking for Major Label Deal
October 5th, 2007Nirvana – MTV Unplugged in New York on DVD
October 5th, 2007Billy Corgan Supports The Bob Moog Foundation
October 5th, 2007RIAA Wins against Jammie Thomas Illegally Downloading Music
October 5th, 2007RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) gets $220,000 from Jammie Thomas of Brainerd, Minnesota who was sued for illegally downloading music. RIAA formerly originally offered the woman to have her illegal downloading settled with a standard “low cost” fine of only a few hundred or thousand dollar, but she refused and went to court instead. She lost! RIAA wins!
Now, I’m in no way advocating illegal downloading – it’s bad and I encourage everyone to buy legal music, however there is something not quite right about this case. The woman was found guilty of illegal downloading based on the IP address that was used to download. Not even her hard drive was presented as the evidence. In the year 2007, when hacking to unprotected wireless networks happens on day to day basis, in the age when Trojans hijack people’s computers, in an age like that a woman is found guilty illegal downloading of music based on her IP address? No other evidence that the woman was in fact doing it… nothing but her IP address!
Anyway, it’s about time illegal downloaders start getting busted. Maybe it will help send clear message to those who are still doing it…
Another interesting finding is, that she wasn’t sued because she was downloading music, it was because Jammie Thomas made music available for others to download. So it looks like it’s not even illegal downloading that’s an issue here, it’s offering the music for others to download without paying royalties to the artist.
That however makes some sense to the point:
If there were no people who share copyrighted music, there would be no people downloading it illegally – that makes sense. Furthermore – from the prosecutor’s point of view – it’s easier to bust the ass of someone who shared the music 2500 times, than go after the 2500 people who illegally downloaded it from them. It also sends clear message to the others who offer files for illegal downloads and might contribute to making them stop.
What RIAA needs to do right now is to invest extra money and time to giving this case more exposure. That would improve their settlement conversion rate significantly and would become great source of income for RIAA. Even by sending out letters to small offenders and collecting as little as $1000 from them would boost their bank to fight serious sharers and downloaders, or organized groups.
Back to the court ordered fine – $220 000. Damn… That’s a pretty high fine. Granted, Jammie Thomas should have taken on the offer she got from the RIAA to settle it without court, but still… $220 000 is a lot. I’m glad it set strong precedence, but how did they get to such high figure? Well, let’s see:
It seems to be based on the premise form the recording industry which assumes that everyone who downloads a file would have bought the CD but they didn’t because they were able to get the music illegally. So in other words they assume that every illegal download translates as a lost sale. That is what pumps the price of your fine up this high and if you ask me… it’s a bit of a bald statement right there and not a very good premise to build your court conclusion upon.
On the other hand – court decisions are made as punishments to those who broke the law as well as deterrents to those considering breaking the law. If the punishments were reasonable, people would weigh the punishment against the crime and many might realize that they can “afford” to do the crime. If the judgment is lofty, the deterrent is greater.