In a case in the US that is drawing a bit of attention at the moment, a court has awarded the RIAA damages of USD$1,920,000 (around AUD$2,398,940) in the second round of a trial against Jammie Thomas, accused of downloading just 24 mp3s from the Internet.

Initially offered settlement at "just" USD$9,250 per song, the jury went away and decided that's not enough and bumped it up to USD$80,000 per song.

Ars have a good article and Slashdot is worth a read, particularly for the comments of user 'NewYorkCountryLawyer', a lawyer running a campaign against the tactics of the RIAA and MPAA. His blog is a good read, and points out that this will probably go to a third trial:

Well I guess there is going to be a third trial. I hope that during the next trial the technical evidence will be challenged, that the issue of recoverability of statutory damages will be tested, and that the plaintiffs will be required to prove (a) dissemination of copies (b) to the public, (c) by a sale or other transfer of ownership, or by lease, rental, or lending, before being deemed to have shown an infringement of the distribution right. The nonsensical exorbitancy of the verdict actually enhances the constitutionality argument, demonstrating how open ended the statute is if the RIAA's wild eyed interpretation of it is allowed to survive.

How the hell can downloading a $2 song for $0 entitle you to $3204723 compensation? What the fuck are they thinking...

thats some expensive music, I'm interested to know just how they go about justifying $80k per song

damn music industry, everyone hates the RIAA/MPAA and they -are- the music industry.
it's all just a front so that we keep buying music but we also have someone to hate on, meanwhile the (non mpaa/riaa side of the) music industry looks all shiny and "innocent"

paging faceman

How does prosecuting one random dude make any difference??

yeah bully the little guys. nice one music industry.

How does prosecuting one random dude make any difference??

Pays the lawyers to sue another 10 :)

How does prosecuting one random dude make any difference??

it's scare tactics is all - obviously they have zero expectation that they're going to get anything more than a couple grand out of these people (barely worth the effort when you consider the legal cost). Pity they didn't take all that money into modifying their business practices, because obviously it's made fuck all difference, other than taking money out of the pockets of artists and trying to plug the holes in the dam.

Not arguing with the ludicrousness of the fine, but did she download 24 songs, or upload them?

From what I've seen those sort of punitive measures tend to apply when you distribute content, not just obtain it.

The ABC article mentions she used Kazaa - so she most probably uploaded.

Ouch. Just declare bankruptcy.

ohh $80k ... better update my irc script!

[13:38:46] (+demon) I owe the RIAA US$1,313,280,000 of which they will never see a cent. (16,416 mp3s @ US$80000 per breach of struggling artist's copyright.)

heh. even though... in reality the mp3s i have aren't the sort the riaa would be interested in, nor did i download them using p2p.

Maybe it was Spooks Top 10 so it was worth the cost?

Maybe it was Spooks Top 10 so it was worth the cost?

Hahahaha.

During the verdict the Jury was quoted as saying, "American Pie - Madonna!? The defendant MUST pay a hefty price for distributing that shit!"

Holy fuck.. If i got busted i would be in a lot of debt.

Conroys Web Filter when its passed will be extended to P2P because Pedophiles share porn on P2P too. And then the Music Companies will be safe again to price gouge us.

I have my suspicions that the big ChildPorn raids over the last 12 months are actually a plot conceived by the RIAA to spread fear and disgust at P2P and lead to the Banning of P2P software.

Well, don't break the laws and then complain about it when you get caught... but 80k per song? I'm conflicted :O

A single mum with 4 kids... fucking great work RIAA.

Makes me wish for the revenge of Napster.......

So when are they going to start hitting the big groups that release these things? Reloaded would probably be arrested for life with how much they're sourced to the public. That will cut down on 80% of the illegal downloads (games at least). Instead they pick on a tiny person who in the grand scheme of things cost them a total of 5c profit.

Her case is highlighted in the Rip - A Remix Manifesto doco I highlighted in the thread about Steroids. Worth the download fer sure.

Mouse me

Maybe it was Spooks Top 10 so it was worth the cost?

haaha, i would have rated my top 10 at round $150k per song fyi