Mother of 12 year old settles with RIAA to avoid costly legal battle



I just posted the article Mother of 12 year old settles with RIAA to avoid costly legal battle.

This excellent AP article fills us in on the latest in the RIAA crusade of justice. A quote from the article says: "The legal assault on music file-swappers is an unparalleled…

Read the full article here:  [](

Feel free to add your comments below. 

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


Can anyone tell that the settlement ammount was supposed to be before the dollar sign bug?


It is 2000 USD per the article.


I’m guessing Mr Sherman is about 5 ft 3in and has a small dick…oh, and probably drives a red sportscar…Go Sen Durbin…:X


The RIAA knows this family couldn’t afford to fight and was more than likely scared to death, so the family panicked and paid. This is where the EFF and Stamp out the RIAA and every other organization failed, they could have picked this one up and probably won since a fee was paid to Sharman. I’ll bet the reason the EFF didn’t was because they receive some kind of compensation from Sharman. If I were this family I would contact an attorney to now look at this fee Sharman is charging.


It starts here. Everybody, and everybody you know, not buy any music in the month of December 2003. Unless its used that will be alright. Tell everybody you know and spread it on every network of every kind. December will hit em hard, like a train hitting a bus. :slight_smile:


i’ll have to buy chirstmas presents (including my own to me :+ :B) on november… oh well, whatever… :X


Have you ever donated money to EFF? No? Maybe that’s why they can’t pick up EVERY lawsuit out there for free. More likely, the lawsuit and settlement happened all within a couple of days. This may have been over before EFF was able to contact her. Your correlation between EFF and Sharman makes no sense at all.


If Sharman tries this bullshit overseas he’ll be sorry. Cause where I live laws are tough when it comes to justify your lawsuit. Presenting files scanned from a user pc is not going to help them in court - in fact, the decision might go the other way. Sharman is going to die suffering from two of the 7 Sins - gluttony and greed.


[QUOTE]Your correlation between EFF and Sharman makes no sense at all.[/QOTE] I dislike idiots that can’t read, jump over to the EFF website and do a search for Kazza, Grokster and the like, If you don’t think these p2p and the EFF are in bed together your are an *ss, The woman paid a fee to Sharman Networks, Sharman networks donates money to the EFF to protect P2P. Read and learn, EFF is no better than RIAA they will support the big boys thru their dontated efforts but to hell with the little guys. Read the active and passed cases and then come back and talk smack.


:frowning: I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If you get sued or notified that your name is being sought after from your ISP, then encrypt/delete all of your illegal mp3’s. Do NOT and I repeat DO NOT settle out of court or admit guilt. There is absolutely not way that the RIAA can prove without a shadow of a doubt that you did anything illegal on a filesharing network unless they have one of your mp3 files and they get your harddrive and show that you have the exact same file. I work for an ISP and the only logs we keep are that a transaction took place, not what the contents of the transaction were so there is no independent 3rd party that can verify that the file they have came from you unless you are caught with it on your harddrive. You cannot lose a lawsuit unless the RIAA has physical proof which they can only get by getting your hard drive with the files on it.


Just what/whom is the RIAA going after…those who “make available” numerous files on the P2P networks, or those who ONLY download ?? It seems to me, that simply downloading files may be a much harder struggle for the RIAA. In such a situation, I expect that ACLU (or other) groups may actually support defense postures. As so far (in the USA) as parents responsibility is concerned…(aka to whom the ISP lists as the contracted user)…Iit;s my opinion that the RIAA has a MUCH bugger up hill battle. They say (wish) parents have control over their kids (24/7)…yet in numerous cases where minors got a hold of firearms, many coursts have chosen NOT to hold the parents responsible! Surely a gun is much more potentially dnagerous than an Internet connection! Coimments welcome… :frowning:


Sorry, I meant BIGGER not BUGGER…still maybe this was even funnier!


Hey kain good info!:slight_smile: Let me ask a question as you work for an ISP. I understand a log for security purposes. But why don’t they dump the info in a week or so? Just curious. Tia! :X mrdisk: I think that what gets folks in trouble is not downloading. It’s sharing. ie the little girl had 1000 files in her shared folder. The RIAA downloads from the folder I think then busts yer butt with headers and “fingerprints”. My feeling is you can leech all day no problemo. Somebody else got another theory?.
[edited by Crabbyappleton on 11.09.2003 00:15]


There is no spoon, eh, no RIAA. Repeat after me: Nobody has been sued, these are just rumours. 200 people ALLEGEDLY sued and the number of sharers on fasttrack drops from 4,5 to 3 mio people. YOU ARE COWARDS! The zeropaid members spread panic everywhere and everyone seems to believe them. RIAA might go after people with thousands of files, so remove all files except for 2 or 3 and share them


THey dont scare me… Ill represent myself in court… Im innocent till proven guilty and without physical evidence its very difficult to prove your case…


As David Bowie said “Why sue your fans.” Very powerful if I may say so my self… VB9999


Pfff… They threat for $ 150,000 per song and then settle for $ 2000, this is b*llshit, all they need is money. I would personally sue my ISP and get $ 100,000 from them, then I’d sue RIAA for having no physical proof… No whatnot.