Jorge
May 16th, 2008, 12:41 PM
Says that federal rulings that "making available" music in a "shared folder" doesn't constitute copyright infringement may mean that Jammie Thomas could get a new trial.
In light of a series of recent federal court rulings that have determined that simply putting music in a KaZaA's "shared folder" doesn't in itself constitute copyright infringement, that actual illegal distribution of music must take place, U.S. District Court Judge Michael Davis is considering granting Jammie Thomas, the first person ever convicted of illegal file-sharing, a new trial.
From the court brief:
The Court is contemplating granting a new trial for a different reason – on the grounds that the Court committed a manifest error of law when, in Jury Instruction No.
<p><a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~a/zeropaid?a=9t0F9F"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~a/zeropaid?i=9t0F9F" border="0"></img></a></p>
Read Full Article Here (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/zeropaid/~3/291752466/Judge+in+First+File-Sharing+Trial%3A+%27Oops%2C+Maybe+You+Do+Need+Actu al+Distribution%27)
In light of a series of recent federal court rulings that have determined that simply putting music in a KaZaA's "shared folder" doesn't in itself constitute copyright infringement, that actual illegal distribution of music must take place, U.S. District Court Judge Michael Davis is considering granting Jammie Thomas, the first person ever convicted of illegal file-sharing, a new trial.
From the court brief:
The Court is contemplating granting a new trial for a different reason – on the grounds that the Court committed a manifest error of law when, in Jury Instruction No.
<p><a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~a/zeropaid?a=9t0F9F"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~a/zeropaid?i=9t0F9F" border="0"></img></a></p>
Read Full Article Here (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/zeropaid/~3/291752466/Judge+in+First+File-Sharing+Trial%3A+%27Oops%2C+Maybe+You+Do+Need+Actu al+Distribution%27)