Discover Yahoo! With Your Friends

Explore news, videos, and much more based on what your friends are reading and watching. Publish your own activity and retain full control.

To get started, first

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    Amplifier

    Minnesota Mom Hit With $1.5 Million Fine for Downloading 24 Songs

    What's the value of a song? Jammie Thomas-Rasset has spent the last few years in court debating that question. The Minnesota mother of four is being penalized for illegally downloading and sharing 24 songs on the peer-to-peer file-sharing network Kazaa in 2006, but how much she owes the record labels has been in question. The jury in her third trial has just ruled that Thomas-Rasset should pay Capitol Records $1.5 million, CNET reports, which breaks down to $62,500 per song. It's a heavy penalty considering the 24 tunes would only cost approximately $24 on iTunes, which was Thomas-Rasset' argument, too.

     

    Thanks to Thomas-Rasset's colorful case, she has become the public face of the record industry's battle with illegal downloaders. In her first trial, in 2007, the jury demanded she pay $222,000 for violating the copyright on more than 1,700 songs by Green Day, Aerosmith and Richard Marx, to name a few. (Marx said he was "ashamed" to be associated with the "farcical" prosecution of an illegal downloader.) Thomas-Rasset maintained she wasn't the computer user who did the file sharing, and her legal team cited an error in jury instruction to secure a second trial in 2009 that ended with a much harsher result: an astronomical fine of $1.92 million. However, earlier this year a U.S. District Court judge found the $1.92 million penalty against Thomas-Rasset to be "monstrous and shocking" and "gross injustice" before lowering it to $54,000, or $2,250 a song. Thomas-Rasset and her legal team decided to appeal that decision, too.

    [Millions to spare: Lottery winners give away their jackpot]

    The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the organization that represents the four major record labels, was pleased by the most recent decision, even if it has no intention to collect the $1.5 million from Thomas-Rasset. "Now with three jury decisions behind us along with a clear affirmation of Ms. Thomas-Rasset's willful liability, it is our hope that she finally accepts responsibility for her actions," the RIAA said in a statement. Earlier this year, the RIAA offered Thomas-Rasset the opportunity to end the legal battle for $25,000 and an admission of guilt; Thomas-Rasset declined.

    [Rewind: Album becoming a thing of the past]

    Burying a Midwestern mom in insurmountable debt isn't the best publicity move, so rather than argue the labels are entitled to the cash, the RIAA has sought to make this trial into a cautionary tale for anyone considering illegally downloading music -- a reminder that there are penalties. But as the constantly declining weekly Nielsen SoundScan sales figures demonstrate, nothing seems to have deterred music fans from stealing rather than purchasing songs and albums. And in a digital world now dominated by Bit Torrent and Rapidshare, a trial over a music-sharing dinosaur like Kazaa seems nothing but antiquated. (Last month, after a decade of illegal file sharing, peer-to-peer service LimeWire was shut down by the government, much to the surprise of the millions who thought LimeWire had faded years ago into the Internet ether.)

    [Watch: Top 100 music videos]

    Still, Thomas-Rasset and her legal team are already making plans to appeal, setting the stage for a fourth trial. "The fight continues," promised Thomas-Rasset's lawyer Kiwi Camara. Even if Thomas-Rasset were to win the next trial, the RIAA would likely appeal that decision to ensure that copyright infringement without penalization won't happen. This story has the potential to drag on well into the next decade -- when for $1.5 million, all of Thomas-Rasset's four kids could finish law school and take up the fight on her behalf.

    [Photo: AP]

    Other popular Yahoo! stories:
    Miley Cyrus splits with boyfriend
    Comedian tops lists of overpaid actors
    Billy Joel's 'Uptown Girl' not Christie Brinkley

     

    We apologize. An error has occurred. Please try again.
     
     
    Top Locations Lower Hutt San Diego Las Vegas

    12,661 comments

    • Gabriel Martinez  •  Las Vegas, Nevada  •  8 days ago
      It's pretty darn wrong she got fined for downloading sound.
    • Michael  •  7 months ago
      Isn't there something in the constitution about cruel and unjust punishment?
      • Mauro 4 months ago
        Cruel and unusual punishment.
    • applewood  •  1 year 2 months ago
      This is absurd because the music labels could/should have just asked her for the owed money (in a direct letter or through small claims court) like you or I would if she owed us - instead it goes to court to set a precedence..and who's money is it that pays for the courts? Ours.
    • Brittney  •  3 months ago
      I would like to see an exact receipt of WHY they would demand over sixty grand per song.
      • jane doe 2 months ago
        Don't you know? The starving artists she "stole" from are suffering... Steven Tyler wasn't able to get a gold plated Mercedes this year... he had to settle for a Porsche *shivers* oh, the humility.
    • gṏяοuи∂&яσῧηϑ  •  3 months ago
      Oh please. 24 songs. 15 million dollars. ARE YOU EFFING ME? There is no way that THAT should be the cost for 24 songs. hahaha
    • Rachael  •  San Diego, California  •  3 months ago
      I don't do file sharing or music downloading, but what about artists who put their music online as a free download for people so they can get noticed in hopes that people will buy their cd's.
    • Lucas TdS  •  1 year 3 months ago
      Why is it that stealing songs is equated with a crime of such capital proportions?!

      If we agree that each song was worth one dollar, then 24 songs = $24 worth of crime. This crime is the equivalent to if she walked out of a CD store with 2 CDs and got caught by a security guard. In real life, petty theft like that would be handled by small claims court.
      • Bethany 4 months ago
        she uploaded the songs meaning others were able to download the songs because she put them online so its like there might have been only 24 songs costing maybe $24 dollars but there could have been thousands of downloads from others but the amount they want her to pay is still ridiculous cause i'm sure there wasn't 1 million people who downloaded the songs but then again if 1 thousand people down loaded the song and then uploaded it on a site and then more people then it might start to add up but that doesn't make all of it the woman being sueds fault. also if someone was caught stealing $24 dollars of merchandise they would not be fined just $24 dollars, I know someone who stole a $5 compact(makeup) and was fined $200 and she was a minor at the time.
    • minnie  •  1 year 3 months ago
      if there albums are so good why do we only down a couple of songs of each one if they put a better effort in the music maybe people won't download and they would pay for them... oh wait it is a rip off if you already paid for them once
    • Row  •  1 year 2 months ago
      hey just a thought but how about ppl start recording the audio off youtube vids? that way you get the song, theres some royalties go to the record companies.............the artist may see a penny for every 100 or so plays? ah why not make music like it used to be? where bands got their money from gigs! that way it would expose your "studio produced" artists and give the real tallent a chance to shine
    • MikaSch  •  1 year 3 months ago
      All such great comments here. What I would love to see is Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) get 1.5 Million Fine ( or any similar amount) from this woman. They simply made her a scapegoat. Some idiot lawyers got their 10 minutes of fame. The country still goes on, economic crisis still festers, Kanye West remains a ghetto assed idiot. People still remember Britney infamous " hoohah flash". Gee Dubya still believes that Saddam Hussein had WMD. Barry Obama thinks he will win the next election. Sara Pailin thinks she gonna be the (soon to be announced) "Coffee Party" president......life goes on.
    • AmandaL  •  1 year 3 months ago
      Stealing is wrong period,but also with my luck I would be the 1 in a million to get caught.lol
    • mushroom_head  •  1 year 3 months ago
      So when I go to the public library, where they have 100's of cd's available to check out for free, and I check a few out bring them home and copy them does that mean I'm in deep @#$% or the library? Seems to me there is no difference, maybe we better shut down all the libraries just to be safe.
    • GHOSTHAND  •  1 year 4 months ago
      I think Mark Cuban should hire her as a CHEERLEADER!
    • basil 13  •  1 year 4 months ago
      It would make sense to sue if she was selling their product without giving them a cut, but sharing it for free is how songs used to get the most recognition. Why do dogs lick themselves? Answer: 'cuz they can. Same reason for multi million dollar corporations to sue some poor gal. Even tho their bank accounts are bursting , they will never have enough.
    • JD  •  1 year 4 months ago
      Do you rembember when we used to make copies of cassettes and later CD's for friends? It's just easier now with the internet. Case Dismissed!!!!
    • Pressure Y  •  1 year 4 months ago
      Bruce.... You said it all... I agree with that! $124.00....
    • Candice  •  1 year 4 months ago
      It sounds like some jury members were paid off by the record labels, to decide on a fine of that amount it crazy.
    • Lefty  •  1 year 4 months ago
      Lots of arguments from both sides--- and while I do tend to agree offhand that this is excessive, think of it this way. You have to know that this is at minimum on the shady side of things. I mean, c'mon. A CD costs $15 at a store, but you can download it for free? You know that no one gets paid if you download for free, so logic dictates that if you take something without paying for it in any way, and never intending to pay for it, you is stealing. It doesn't matter if you're stealing from a fatcat record producer or who, it is stealing. It also doesn't matter if you're a mother of four or a single person. Nor does it matter that "everyone else is doing it" or what "everyone else" gets for their punishment. We're not talking about "everyone else."

      And as to the "it wasn't my computer doing the file sharing"--- ie blame kazaa for hosting it, I sort of agree, but it does take two to tango, no one forced her to go to that site and download crap, and realistically in most jurisdictions you can still be prosecuted for posession of stolen property, even if you were not the one who stole it.

      As to the excessive amount, how much money do you think the record company has laid out in lawyers, and how much has the court laid out in terms of manpower, paperwork and recordkeeping, etc etc etc. These people that are saying $24 and be done, I don't think so! That ship has sailed, and rightfully so. 3 trials in 3 years? Cmon lady give it up already! This is a waste of everyone's time and money.

      This is not to mention the fact that is apparently overlooked by many posters, that this is not really "just" about a couple of songs. To quote the article: "In her first trial, in 2007, the jury demanded she pay $222,000 for violating the copyright on more than 1,700 songs by Green Day, Aerosmith and Richard Marx, to name a few."

      1700 songs? This sounds like a repeat offender to me, not just a housewife loading up itunes to wash the dishes to.

      She should be barred from receiving any compensation on a book deal, reality TV show, etc, and be forced to pay the cost of a legitimate download of all songs in question + the record company's attorney costs + reimburse the taxpayers for the amount of resources used in her stupid useless trials. Oh, wait, maybe that's 1.5 million already.
    • Brickman  •  1 year 4 months ago
      As someone said, you don't get sued by
      the RIAA for stealing a CD in a record
      store. When are reason and logic going
      to rule the day instead of greed and hate?
      America has lost her ability to lead
      and it's obvious every day in little ways!
    • Malaka  •  1 year 4 months ago
      this is the most stupidest thing i ever heard of. the record labels are already rich, we hear their songs on the radio already so why should it be illegal to download their music, obviously she adored them as a fan to their music so she shouldnt be punished. personally if this happened to me, which it wont cuz no celebrity is worth my time to download and pay for their music but if it did i would never like that artist again.