Jammie Thomas file-sharing fines reduced to a sliver

vbimport

#1

Jammie Thomas file-sharing fines reduced to a sliver.

[newsimage]http://static.myce.com/images_posts/2010/01/xrh1RH.jpg[/newsimage]Jammie Thomas-Rasset will no longer have to pay $1.9 million for illegally downloading and distributing 24 songs over the Internet.


Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/jammie-thomas-file-sharing-fines-reduced-to-a-sliver-25215/](http://www.myce.com/news/jammie-thomas-file-sharing-fines-reduced-to-a-sliver-25215/)


Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

Still damn expensive per song.


#3

[QUOTE=paulw2;2488486]Still damn expensive per song.[/QUOTE]

It’s called a deterrent, and had he just purchased the songs legally he would be at least $53,976 ahead…


#4

And the artists will see not a penny of it going to them…they must think the rest of the people reading this must be dumbed to notice nothing will go to the artist whom created the music.


#5

I think this is way more reasonable than the original fine, however punishments are supposed to fit the crime.

Had he walked into a store and physical stolen a box of CD’s, and then handed them out, it would of been theft under 5000? and a slap on the wrist?

I would think on a scale of things thats bad, download/uploading something on p2p is as bad as speeding on a highway? Which is usually punishable by a few hundred dollars fine. maybe thats just me… but when you look at all the offenses, and their related punishments, I don’t rank minor copyright infringement much higher then speeding or shoplifting. Which are bad, but not world ending bad.


#6

[QUOTE=Zod;2488576]I would think on a scale of things thats bad, download/uploading something on p2p is as bad as speeding on a highway? Which is usually punishable by a few hundred dollars fine. maybe thats just me… but when you look at all the offenses, and their related punishments, I don’t rank minor copyright infringement much higher then speeding or shoplifting. Which are bad, but not world ending bad.[/QUOTE] You forget that speeding on the highway only increases the risk of killing or injuring other people on the road, while illegally down/uploading music and movies increases the risk of depriving media company executives of some of their bonuses, which is obviously a far more serious matter! :stuck_out_tongue:


#7

@Zod, I like your comparison to walking into a store to steal CD’s.

Downloading/sharing files seems like even LESS of an offense than stealing a physical CD, so I believe the penalties should be matched to that of a physical CD.


#8

[QUOTE=Blu-rayFreak;2488759]@Zod, I like your comparison to walking into a store to steal CD’s.

Downloading/sharing files seems like even LESS of an offense than stealing a physical CD, so I believe the penalties should be matched to that of a physical CD.[/QUOTE]

One must not forget it’s not what you want they want their greed regardless of not paying the artist for their work and creation.


#10

OK in principal it is wrong to steal, so the RIAA charges $ 22.000 + for an illegally downloaded song, it seems excessive in the extreme, when the banking industry has in essence just done the same thing to the American public, where is their punishment . My point being is that if we are going to have laws apply them to ALL violators of the law, from the lowest common man to the bankers on wall street , but it seems to me that it’s all ways the common man who pays the price.
just my .02 cents.


#11

The punishment must fit the seriousness of the crime and in setting a penalty the ability to pay should also be paramount in setting the penalty.