When Jammie Thomas was fined $1.92 million for sharing 24 songs, the verdict sent shock waves throughout the world. Thomas’ lawyers then appealed the decision based on a number of factors including saying that the award was unconstitutionally high. Now, the US government, namely the Department of Justice (DoJ), is stepping in to defend the RIAA and urging the judge to reject Thomas’ claim that the award was unconstitutional.
The appeals process takes time. That’s why we haven’t heard much from the Jammie Thomas case in a few months now. Back then, many Americans saw the award of $1.92 million as shocking and another reason to see the copyright laws as a departure from reality. The verdict even made waves during the Canadian copyright consultation as major reason to not go down the lawsuit road while considering new copyright laws.
That’s what, for many, makes this latest development all the more shocking.
According to a legal brief filed by the Department of Justice, the Department of Justice is arguing, “If it is necessary to reach the constitutional question to resolve defendant’s motion, then defendant’s motion should be rejected because Conress’ carefully crafted statute satisfies the Due Process Claus.”
They further argue, “The current damages range provides compensation for copyright owners because, inter alia, there exist situations in which actual damages are hard to quantify. Accordingly, the statutory range specified by Congress for a copyright infringement satisfies due process.”
In other words, they argue that because there is little to no evidence that points to actual harm, the damages should be this high in the first place and, therefor, not unconstitutional to fine a young woman $1.92 million for sharing non-commercial copies of 24 songs.
In short, philosophically speaking, the Department of Justice’s argument is this: Actual damages is hard to show. Congress made a copyright law with a given range of damages. Therefor Thomas cannot claim damages are unconstitutional.
There’s probably hundreds of ways to point out why this argument fails. Saying that actual damages are hard to claim is irrelevant to how constitutional the award is. So premise one doesn’t work. Congress have passed copyright laws, but laws can be overruled by the constitution. If congress passed a law that dictated that no more elections shall be had and the current party must stay permanently in power, the constitution would overrule it. Since the constitution has power over lawmaking, premise two is false. Therefor, the DoJ argument fails miserably here.
The bigger concern here is that this is a plain example of a government backing a few particular corporations. Why is the government trying to interfere in this particular case – especially helping the RIAA gang up on someone who has little to no hope in paying off the $1.92 million award in the first place. One wonders why the RIAA needs the whole government backing their case in the first place? Was it getting difficult to fight in the first place and has to resort to the whole government with their unlimited resources to help win the case?
In any event, the government backing the RIAA in a lawsuit may be more disturbing than the fact that the defendant was fined $1.92 million for sharing 24 songs non-commercially.
Have a tip? Want to contact the author? You can do so by sending a PM via the forums or via e-mail at drew@zeropaid.com.
Related Posts
- No Deal! Jammie Thomas to Appeal $1.92 Million Fine
- Jammie Thomas Fined $1.92 Million for Sharing 24 Songs
- Judge Tosses Out RIAA’s First File-Sharing Conviction, Thomas Granted New Trial!
- Jammie Thomas Challenges “Arbitrary” $80,000 p/song Verdict
- Jammie Thomas Wants a Retrial, Says Damages Unconstitutional
Loading ...
Shock and awe is not just a military concept. It also applies to the media. It is probably hard to fathom for most people that the government appears to serve private companies. It is often explained by the corruption of some officials, or in the worst case of the party or system itself.
It occurs to the fewest that the officials and the system actually just could be employees to the private companies. And that is logical if you think:”why would officials serve the entertainment industry”. So let us just take the hypothesis for a second that the officials and the music industry and the RIAA are NOT as stupid as they seem. Let us for a moment just judge the tree from its fruit. What do these mighty (though few as compared to us public) people succeed with? the artificial limitation of access to culture for millions of consumers. Number of unique shared music files (pirated songs): 1,4 billion. Number of songs legally accessible digitally: 7 million. This means that 0,5% of our musical cultural heritage is made artificially unavailable (highjacked) by private interests. And what is the net result of this? a total control on what, where and how is sent out in terms of music and lyrics. A total control over one of the most subversive and creative population on earth: Musicians. In those terms the system is doing a pretty good job. Making money is just an excuse, like some other people would be using drugs to finance the Contras for example. Meanwhile, on the musicians opinion on the matter read Courtney Love’s speech called Courtney does the math.
Sorry, I meant 99,5% of our musical cultural heritage is made artificially unavailable (highjacked) by private interests. Cheers
Unavailable? Are you kidding? Amazon’s got all of it. In quality hardcopy that will last several lifetimes if you take care of it. Most of it costs a tiny amount of money, it’s just not free.
Only works most of the time if you’re into mainstream stuff. If you’re into indie stuff, Amazon is touch and go at best.
Lol I can’t buy no Mugenjou albums on Amazon. They also don’t supply any UK Chiptunes or hardcore Gabber music from the Netherlands. Also their selection of quality rave techno is extremely lacking.
Hahaha try buying obscure music on Amazon, especially if it’s from another country. Nope, can’t find it. Not to mention, if I do find something good on Amazon, they will probably sell the remastered version (garunteed to be overcompressed garbage). And “In quality hardcopy that will last several lifetimes if you take care of it. “? I don’t care how well you care for a cd, it aint goin lifetimes without a scratch. Now a nice mp3 or flac will last forever if you remember to back them up, and move them from hard drive to hard drive as time goes by.
@norm1515,
You are right, many music is not available on Amazon, and the majority of tracks there are overcompressed from remaster versions. Many music from original versions I can get only from file-sharing networks or friends who lend to me their old original not remaster CD albums.
Still posting blatant lies, malgre?
Welcome to fascist Amerika!
The government is corrupt and the RIAA is run by a bunch of greedy Jews!
Yes the entire world is run by Jews, crazy nut bag. Comments like yours makes legitimate users seem like dicks, please shut your mouth unless you have something worth while to state.
I have a better idea. Why don’t you shut your mouth while the real complaints are heard.
Sorry, there is no such thing as a real complaint from a racist douchebag, it just does not happen. If you have some valid points to make make them without being a dick, otherwise shut your mouth.
Seriously racebaiter, go back to 4chan. Nobody likes you.
Cool story, bro.
(You are obviously a troll, and a poor one at that. Nobody thinks your clever, funny, or shocking.)
Actually you can find a lot for free on youtube, but the sound quality is crappy. Amazon quality hardcopy? no no no! we want the LPs back, or even better the good old live ferformances of the 30’s. Oops, sorry, that is exactly what musicians like Prince do: money on concerts only.
Really, get a life, people actually seem willing to pay for fairly priced digital music, even streamed (say, $ 0,10 a tune in that case), in high quality, to a mobile unit and would prefer the artist not to be screwed by the record industry in the process. Are we talking science fiction here?
I am not a racist. I am telling the truth. Any business in which their any form of Jewish constituency involved always resulting in greed. And the music and motion picture business industries are prime examples of greed in motion. And theses industries are taking out their frustrations on us and are blaming us for them not being able to make a profit and so the only way for them to make a bukc is to sue their customers who already hate their fucking guts as it is.
If it sounds racist to you, that is because you make it sound racist and are blowing it way out of proportion.
Hahahahaha
First you say “Im not racist”. Then you say Jews are greedy. Something doesn’t add up.
Honestly I can’t tell if you’re engaging in juvenile racebaiting, or if you seriously believe in a jewish conspiracy. In the case of the latter, I suggest you go out and meet some real jewish people. You’ll discover Jews are no different than other people. Your assertion that jews controll the government scapegoats jews while ignoring systemic corruption in western democracies. Anyone who believes in some worldwide jewish conspiracy is truly a crackpot.
“I am not a racist. I am telling the truth. Any business in which their any form of Jewish constituency involved always resulting in greed….”
Epic Fail.
You are blaming corporate greed on the jews, so yes that is racism. That flawed view dates back to when the Jewish people were money lenders because other religions forbid it. People were pissed off with their rates even tho they were only providing a service. Your current view is only strengthened because of the fact that all industries have Jews working in them, just like Christians Atheists and whatever other religion. You are placing judgment on a group based on a couple peoples, some not even Jewish, that is racism. You are being racist, if you can see that than I don’t know what to tell you, maybe you should get your brain checked.
Yes, he would be racist, except for one little detail…
Jewish is a religion not a race, moron.
Next time you try to white knight it, perhaps you should do a bit of research so as to not look like the buffoon that you appear to be.
Jewish does not only refer to a religion. It refers to one’s ethnic background. There are people who are ethnically Jewish who may not even follow the Jewish religion. Thus, Spreading lies like “Jews Controll The Government” is undeniably racist.
Next time you try to white knight it perhaps you should do a bit of research
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti_Semitism
Actually, for the some insight into the entire matter, just visit,
whatreallyhappened(*)com
Also look up,
The five dancing Israielis
The USS Liberty
And,, tadahhh
Jonothan Pollard.
Oh wait, one more,
AIPAC
Conspiracy theories are improbable, unfalsifiable, and unnecessary to explain the problems of the world. Thats why you shouldn’t believe in them. They are mostly speculative, and their evidence is circumstantial.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html
My problems with this article:
5 men dancing after the world trade center blew up proves absolutely nothing about the motivations behind the world trade center attacks. For all you know these men could have nothing to do with the world trade center attacks and were just dancing because they always thought the twin towers were an eye sore.
The article has no evidence that these men had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks. Only statements like “perhaps this” and “perhaps that”. Well perhaps the twin towers were destroyed by an invisible pink unicorn. You can say “perhaps” all you want, but everything is just meaningless speculation until you find evidence.
You are worse than those people who think Obama was born in Kenya. Rot in hell.
I am only going to say this one last time. I am not a racist. I am merely telling the truth. And if you don’t believe then you are just as stupid as the people who are in favor of recognizing the Israeli state.
The Jewish religion has the right to exist because it is native to a specific culture, but the state of Israel does not only because of the way in which it was established. The land in which Israel sits on rightfully belongs to (and was stolen from) the Palestinians. And if Israel does not want to pay reparations to the Palestinians for unlawfully taking their land then they deserves to be treated lilke shit.
And as far as I’m concerned as of you wish to continue to call me racist after that explanation, you are seeing things only from your clouded point of view and have no desire to understand.
“The Jewish religion has the right to exist because it is native to a specific culture, but the state of Israel does not only because of the way in which it was established. The land in which Israel sits on rightfully belongs to (and was stolen from) the Palestinians. And if Israel does not want to pay reparations to the Palestinians for unlawfully taking their land then they deserves to be treated lilke shit.”
I’m glad you are able to contribute so much to a discussion about the story about the United States, the DoJ and the Jammie Thomas case.
My advice to you is allow people to speak their minds and you obstructionist morons shut your yaps.
I’m going to seed some music now.
…pricks