The 1.5 Million Dollar Album

Yeah, like any album made in the last 10 years is worth that much. Give me a break.

The amount that the RIAA gets in statutory damages in filesharing lawsuits is already completely bananas, but they still aren't happy. The problem? Compilation CDs. A rascally pirate could rip 10 tracks from 10 CDs, say they came from a compilation and then only be culpable for one album. That's not right! The RIAA would then be cheated out of money they could use to polish the rubies on the ends of their walking sticks!

So what are they doing? Pushing the PRO-IP Act through Congress that'll increase the statutory damages for compilation albums to a whopping $1.5 million. Yes, if you get busted sharing a soundtrack or compilation album with multiple artists on it, the RIAA wants to count each track as its own album. You know, just for the heck of it.

With statutory damages already so out of the league of the rational and the justifiable, increasing the damages this much might actually happen. I mean, if they could justify $150,000 an album before, is it really such a leap to make that $1.5 million?

The moral of the story? Be careful and don't get busted. That and the RIAA makes Mr. Burns look more like Mr. Rogers

[Gizmodo via Ars Technica]

Mother Told To Pay RIAA $220,000: WTF?

Jammie Thomas, the woman who lost her case against the RIAA was ordered to pay $220,000 for downloading 24 songs. The Minnesota woman said that the U.S. copyright laws are unjust and that the cost of proving her innocence was almost impossible. Check the quote:

"It says in the Constitution that there should be no undue fines, I was just fined (9,000 percent more) than the value of these songs." She goes on to say "I was basically forced into a situation where I had to prove a negative. How do you prove that your IP address was spoofed or hacked. If I could afford an FBI analyst I'm sure it could have been proven. But I don't have the money."

Thomas rejected the typical settlement of few thousand dollars and chose to defend herself, and she strongly denies sharing music files. But 12 jurors felt differently and ordered her to pay $9,250 for each of the 24 songs she's accused of downloading.

She is still deciding whether to file an appeal. I would think yes!!!

Does the punishment of $220,000 fit the crime of donwloading 24 songs? I think not!!! Regardless if she's guilty of file sharing, I don't believe that a mother of two should be brought to financial ruin over 24 songs. How the 12 morons on this case came to this conclusion is beyond me, but I hope that somewhere in their lives, they are judged just as harshly.

[Crave]