Warning! Do not download before hiding your IP with a VPN!
Your IP Address is .   Location is
Your Internet Provider can see what you are downloading!  Hide your IP ADDRESS with a VPN!
We strongly recommend using a reliable VPN client to hide yourself on the Internet. It's FREE!
Hide me now!

OMG: RIAA wins, woman has to pay $220k

A Minnesota woman must pay $220,000 to six of the top music labels after a federal jury found on Thursday that she violated their copyright. Accused of encouraging the illegal sharing of more than 1,700 songs, Jammie Thomas, 30, elected to fight it out with the recording industry instead of settling out of court for far less money. The ensuing legal battle marked the first time the recording industry has argued a file-sharing case before a jury. Since 2003, many of the 26,000 persons sued by the Recording Industry Assoc. of America (RIAA) have avoided litigation by agreeing to pay a few thousand dollars. Thomas, who could not be reached for comment, has always maintained her innocence. Accused of sharing music through the use of peer-to-peer service, Kazaa, she told the jury that she didn’t even own a Kazaa account.

The jury didn’t buy her argument. Thomas was ordered to pay $9,250 for each of the 24 songs that the RIAA concentrated on. She was initially accused of sharing 1,702 songs. The decision is important in that it sends a message to file sharers that Internet anonymity won’t protect them from lawsuits, said Chris Castle, a copyright attorney and longtime music industry executive. This is likely not the end of the case, according to Fred von Lohmann, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a group that advocates for Internet users. Late Thursday evening, von Lohmann said that he had heard from several copyright attorneys who had expressed interest in representing Thomas should she want to appeal the decision. “There are a lot of copyright lawyers who would be interested in helping her if she wants to continue this,” von Lohmann said. “I’d imagine that she doesn’t want to pay $200,000. We’ll see what she wants to do.”

The recording industry has claimed that Internet piracy has cost the industry billions of dollars. Ever since the original Napster emerged in the late 1990s, the RIAA has been playing–and some say losing–a game of cat and mouse with file sharers. The RIAA has always said that suing individuals is a last resort. The group battles file sharing through a combination of tactics, including educational programs and taking legal action against sites that help file sharers locate unauthorized music files. When the RIAA does sue individuals, any money it receives from settlements and judgments are generally reinvested into the group’s antipiracy program, said Jonathan Lamy, an RIAA spokesman. “This is not a money-making venture,” he said. Yeah, sure, we all believe in this. Anyway, this sucks, I can imagine many more companies will decide to start filling lawsuits against filesharing people…

Source:  CNN, Zdnet 


Feel free to post your OMG: RIAA wins, woman has to pay $220k torrent, subtitles, samples, free download, quality, NFO, rapidshare, depositfiles, uploaded.net, rapidgator, filefactory, netload, crack, serial, keygen, requirements or whatever-related comments here. Don't be rude (permban), use only English, don't go offtopic and read FAQ before asking a question. Owners of this website aren't responsible for content of comments.
  1. Anon
    October 5th, 2007 | 10:20

    “The recording industry has claimed that Internet piracy has cost the industry billions of dollars.”

    Good thing piracy was the cause and not copyright infringement, otherwise we’d be in trouble.

  2. Pushkin
    October 5th, 2007 | 10:20

    Sorry, I am not very clear about this file sharing thing. If people dowloading files (music or films) throug Rapidshare links (or other servers), is it the same case like file sharing? Please explain this matter for me, I don’t have any idea about this? Thanks

    October 5th, 2007 | 10:21

    So how good are PeerGuardian and Hide IP

  4. October 5th, 2007 | 10:26

    Pushkin: it depends on your country’s laws but downloading from rapidshare for your own usage should be legal in many countries. uploading is a different story though.

    Krieghoff: they are quite useful in protecting you against some organizations but it may also slow down your downloads and it’s obviously not 100% safe

  5. Filter
    October 5th, 2007 | 10:42

    Any dutchies around? We’re still quite safe from all this bull right? Just to make sure that I don’t have to stage a coup just yet.

  6. Kingdom
    October 5th, 2007 | 10:45

    moral of the story: do not ever use kazaa

  7. Frostii
    October 5th, 2007 | 10:45

    Omg, the poor women. I really feel sorry for her.

    #1. How did she get her self into this situation ? (I didnt read the story full)

    #2. Are they ever going to stop hassling people ? Cause in my opinion its never going to stop. Especially with people distributing files on the internet (eg. groups like CLONE, aXXo, etc..)

  8. Darfasti
    October 5th, 2007 | 10:49

    Actually, it is costing the RIAA more money to find and sue these people then it’s making back. They’ve outright admitted this. The lawsuits are more of a preventive measure to try to discourage others from sharing.

    And this ruling is not really a surprise. It is their intellectual property, to do with as they wish. If they don’t want people sharing their property without their permission, they have every right to.

  9. Wintermute
    October 5th, 2007 | 10:51

    Nontheless some SONY spokesman claimed some time ago, that hunting Internet piracy costs them million of dollars, so 220k are not that much. It’s not really like the RIAA won this. It’s more like they got paid their stamps.

    I’m sure the last word is not spoken in this case, though.

  10. MTGG
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:03

    …only in America… The RIAA takes some poor woman to court for allegedly sharing some music files, and she’s ordered to pay out far more than many rapists, drunk drivers, etc. have had to pay their victims or families. Totally disproportionate, and haven’t the RIAA realised that their hit ‘em hard policy isn’t working? Ok, if the woman was making money, then I’d accept she was fair game. But if she just allowed access to these files, then surely a rap on the knuckles would have sufficed… Madness

  11. justice_was_served
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:06

    Serves her right. That’s what you get when you break the law.

  12. Eric
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:07

    I think they should let us do what we want with music and movies because what difference does it make? We go pay for a movie, we download one. So what? So they loose about $10. They are millionaires. We are people who got almost no money and they want us to pay thousands of dollars for download.Forget them.

    Peerguardian 2 FTW!!

  13. October 5th, 2007 | 11:08

    Frostii: yeah it’s not going to stop, it will be only worse in the future. but your second thought is wrong – these groups are pretty safe although it doesnt look like that on a first look. they usually know how to hide themselves and organizations like riaa are so stupid they rather attack against almost innocent people than those who cause the whole issue.

  14. Samuel Sung
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:09

    The cost of CD’s have not gone up since the 80′s. They have been ripping off the consumer since day one. Why do the companies and performers demand such income? Surely the performer enjoys what they do and didn’t start doing so with the sole intent of making $15 million per release. They should be happy with what they get as most of them these days are unskilled and are simply products of the media machine.

  15. justice_was_served
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:10

    Maybe this’ll make her think twice before using Kazaa again.

    Having to pay 200K$+, that’s gotta suck :D

  16. wutname1
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:12

    Owch I live in Minnesota, this hits a little to close to home good thing bit torrent is the only thing i use and same with anyone i know

  17. Obscurax
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:17

    I’m glad I don’t live in the states.

  18. Harry
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:19

    yea the states sucks balls, stupid laws.

  19. philips14c
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:29

    Only in America this could happen! Such a lame country!

  20. gizzledagreat
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:30

    who the hell still uses kazaa? lmaooooooo

    maybe she should’ve used PG and Protowall

  21. kph59
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:34

    lol, kazza. And even though, yes, i seed x2, I NEVER ever upload anything. Might help to save my ass further along.

  22. crapname
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:34

    The funny thing is that the record industry think it´s a good thing they won

  23. Darfasti
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:36

    Um, kph? Seeding IS uploading. It’s the same thing.

  24. dingus khan
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:41

    kph59 : yeah, when you seed you do UPLOAD, dingus.

  25. ryo
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:44

    it seems you don’t know that by seeding a torrent you are indeed uploading data
    in your case, you are uploading twice as much as your are downloading
    who’s laughing now?

  26. Jeunas
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:45

    “$9,250 for each of the 24 songs”

    Now here’s what I don’t get: How can they ask over 9k per song? That’s f*cking ridiculous. If you buy a song from teh tubes it costs ~$1 a piece. So they’re saying that her downloading caused 9000 users to not buy the song. That’s f*cked up. Only in America…

  27. yessuz
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:46

    As far as I remember – you do not have to have “Kazaa Account” I thinks it’s more or less – anonymous.. Well, u may use some kind of username.. but it doesn’t mean she didn’t use it..
    but anyway – who uses kazaa? it’s been like 4 years since I have used Imesh.. not talking about kazaa (which, as the imesh, was full of spyware etc)

  28. Donteanal
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:46

    Yup, thats why you NEVER use P2P software, with torrents it should be ok because it masks what your actually downloading.

    In this case the RIAA and such only target people who have these songs UPLOADED and are offering them to other people to download.

    Its pretty pathetic to be sued over nothing more then sound waves, thats all it is, put your fingers in your ears and you’d never know its there. Like it was said before she got treated worse then real criminals, these losers need to get a real job.

  29. chris
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:47

    I heard about that story this morning and went straight to downloading about 25 albums.

    Too bad I didn’t like about 90% of em…

  30. Jeunas
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:47

    Damn, I almost banned myself. Hadn’t read the naughty word list news. :D

  31. Wankstar
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:47

    Haha loved kph59′s comment.

    Anyhow, i understand they do the lawsuits – pirates stops economic development. But … i don’t care :) .

  32. erok713
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:51

    Is this a joke?

  33. yingjai
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:52

    I know this is a bit off topic, but what does RIAA do with all the money raked in from sales? Not like they give much back to the real contributors. IMO, they’re basically stealing from artists.

  34. George
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:53

    Shame, she should have to pay for all the songs she was sharing. Scummy Criminal

  35. fliptrip
    October 5th, 2007 | 11:58

    And yet Hollywood creates a trilogy of movies glorifying pirates and receives millions of dollars in income from these said movies…Pirates of the Caribbean no lees, but they’re still pirates!

  36. lol
    October 5th, 2007 | 12:09

    LOL @ the picture.

    “MP3 Police”

  37. jgv115
    October 5th, 2007 | 12:28

    better not up something… :S

  38. paul
    October 5th, 2007 | 12:38

    i wonder what would happen if she refused to pay…prison time??

  39. IzzI
    October 5th, 2007 | 12:46

    U.S. laws are like in any contry… only to help the rich…

  40. Armand
    October 5th, 2007 | 12:47

    Words can not describe how ridiculous this is.

  41. lazyink
    October 5th, 2007 | 12:57

    force protocol encryption folks, that what its there for.. kinda.. i think!

    and anyone remember the home taping fiasco of the 80′s.. and how it ruined the industry !!

  42. Armand
    October 5th, 2007 | 13:13

    #40 – Please stop posting comments using my name, it’s childish.

    “They should be happy with what they get as most of them these days are unskilled and are simply products of the media machine.”

    If we know that the music isn’t any good why are we still downloading it?…

  43. Time to act
    October 5th, 2007 | 13:19

    Its pathetic that so many lawyers are downloading stuff and none thinks to do a huge reputation starting to change the stupid “intelectual property” laws.

    Remember when even Prince started to sue his own production company that they forced him (blackmail) to sell his rights and then he never got any real money back for his intellectual property ?
    Anyhow, those foundations and copyright lawyers should just come with some new proposals to change the laws and then we just have to vote and act. Not easy but the only way to really change this.

  44. lol
    October 5th, 2007 | 13:20

    ^ are you the only one in this world with that name ?

  45. Kynch
    October 5th, 2007 | 13:23

    LMAO fliptrip.

    Nah seriously I hope I never get caught, coz it sucks to have to pay. I still buy loads of DVDs and CDs so I feel like I should be allowed to download a few movies and albums, especially if they suck.

    Suck isn’t a naughty word is it now? ^^

  46. Observer
    October 5th, 2007 | 13:24

    This is getting serious! 220 grand for some songs!? And the jury buys it? Has the common man finally been brainwashed by RIAA and its affiliates into accepting their BS?

  47. matt
    October 5th, 2007 | 13:41

    OJ did a better job of getting his “intellectual property” back. They are fighting a losing battle. Wouldn’t it be nice if all performers were like OJ? “Elvis, if you want it back, come and get it.”

  48. Armand
    October 5th, 2007 | 13:41

    #44 – I’m not the only one in the world with this name, but I’m pretty much the only one that’s around here.

    This whole RIAA story is so serious that it’s starting to be funny!

  49. Help Forum
    October 5th, 2007 | 13:41

    It’s too bad there isn’t a p2p legal website where regular people contribute ideas on how to fight these legal battles. I’m not saying run by lawyers, but by regular people so others who are fighting this bullsh.. can find direction on how to argue their case. I wonder how good and how experienced in these matters her lawyer is? Obviously she doesn’t have millions to hire the best firms, so helping people with info and showing our support might be just was the RIAA would be afraid of. Imagine millions of people contributing. She might have won if they made fewer mistakes.
    Oh well, there’s always appeals.

  50. ScytheNoire
    October 5th, 2007 | 13:44

    Nice to see a clueless jury. This is what happens when you have a country (United States) that is run by corporations and lawyers. America is not the land of the free, and it is not for the people. It is a corporate haven where people’s rights come second to the almighty dollar. America is quickly losing it’s democratic status.

  51. peter
    October 5th, 2007 | 14:13

    to all those dudes writing “she got what she deserved”:

    did it ever come to your mind that she might be really innocent ?
    ok admitted, she might be damn stupid as well, but why in the hell should she reject the “cheap” resolving of the issue by paying some grands if she knows that she is guilty ??

    With all those nasty worms, virus and trojans around, it is no big deal to find an infected PC on the net that you can use to download and more important upload any copyrighted stuff. so should all those users that have limited knowledge in the security area be punished for crimes that they didnt do ?
    if that is the case then I feel a bit sorry for all the noobs on the net … very interesting concept of justice… *puke*

  52. Muppen
    October 5th, 2007 | 14:22

    I Bet the money they say that thay have lost is based on how much money they have speent to

    catch us file “mortals” becouse like they said they dont know the acctual loss they do in

    that some people download

    (but i can also say they have lost no money on me becouse i whould now have bought any of

    the music i have downloaded sins that software i dont think its worth the money, And if you

    realy like a game ore software i will buy it)

    but i mean like photoshop? do any of us “Mortals” can afford to buy it? i mean they did not

    lose anything from me there same thing with video-vegas…

    with out the sceen i would have a more booring life but i would not spend any more money…

    Hail the Freedom of speech!!!!

  53. BigJobby
    October 5th, 2007 | 14:34

    ok folks its time to bring the RIAA to justice we got to have them begging for mercy.Piraters & Rippers around the world up the stakes 10 fold rip it all, all media rip every bit of it they want to hand out $200,000 fines where as we can hand out $100000000 on the flip side unite and see them fall.No one deserves such a heavy sentence as was said pedoz get less & they frequent on kazza what are they doing about them sweet jobby all.HIT THEM WHERE IT HURTS.

  54. BigJobby
    October 5th, 2007 | 14:48

    I hope jobby isnt a naughty word ither its a nice way of saying Shi* in scottish

  55. Wow
    October 5th, 2007 | 14:50

    Well this does set a rotten precedent. Oh and to all those going LOL KAZAA well you know this is from a filing about 3 or 4 years ago? What was everyone using in 03 and 04? yeah I just hope usenet stays as unpopular as it has absolutely 0 uploading on the end user part. Honestly a premium account with encryption is looking pretty good right now.

  56. Marlon
    October 5th, 2007 | 14:51

    Nice, burn the thieves…. they cost us all in the end. Nothing like a criminal going down.

  57. indianpunk
    October 5th, 2007 | 15:12

    so is limwire and frostwire unsafe?

    And mr WOW ur lame in procalaiming that usenet rules why pay USENET when u get all the stuff for free from torrents?

    And yeah even in india BIG ISP’s have started sending out warning letter though i am yet to see anything come out of it but the guy who got it changed the isp simple to no further action happened lets wait what happens

    And peergardian definately slows down the download just use some proxy soft that was even posted here if u feel like u are under a watch i am ready to take my chaces coz thier aint no regulation on internet crap here :-)

  58. Donteanal
    October 5th, 2007 | 15:18

    Yeah because paying $20 for a crappy movie is so fair.

    Lmao at the OJ comment, hell yeah i bet people will stop downloading albums if they had the singers bust down there doors screaming “I WANT MY SH** BACK, I THOUGHT YOU WERE A STRAIGHT SHOOTER MAN!”

    Man OJ is so gangsta

  59. YeahRight
    October 5th, 2007 | 15:20

    Oh my god, she broke the law and has to pay, how unfair! How dare the people who were stolen from prosecute, and how dare a jury of her peers find her guilty when she clearly is! Don’t they know that taking another’s property is just peachy and, at least in the minds of thousands of mentally deficient pirates who own nothing worth protecting, should be legal so that must mean it is? Someone has to pay for a crime they committed? It’s a travesty, I tell you, a travesty.

    Do you people even listen to the idiocy that spews fourth from your mouth?

    She did the crime, now she’s going to have to pay. What about this simple equation escapes you people?

  60. OrthodoxAthiest
    October 5th, 2007 | 17:06

    I agree, lots of blinkered comments on here. We’re almost certainly all here because we’re doing something illegal. Do I feel bad… a very small amount. Would I be doing this if I had a music industry’s CEO income… very doubtful.

    On the flip-side, 50 Cent is a multi-millionaire, and I’m buying Ramen Noodles, working a 56-hour professional week and living in a small apartment. No – I don’t feel too bad. If I get caught, I’ll be penalized and that’s the luck of the draw.

    Fingers crossed everybody, but I feel happy in the knowledge this won’t stop, until what you pay is fair and reasonable for what you receive from the music and movie industries (and they stop making us wait so long to buy the movie for home watching!) :D This case is disturbing, but likewise, I’ll increase my downloading, until they come up with a more sensible deterent… like lower prices. :)

  61. hikaricore
    October 5th, 2007 | 17:07

    She could always.. *gasp*… just not pay them.

    @YeahRight: Shut your fscking mouth.

  62. October 5th, 2007 | 17:10

    Im not getting involved in this cat fight

  63. Anonymous
    October 5th, 2007 | 17:21

    RIAA wil be destructed in the next few hours

  64. philly
    October 5th, 2007 | 17:33

    #16 – I too in MN. I too dropped Kazaa ages ago. I have many thoughts…please Feel free to hit ANY of them!!!!!!

    Hosting on Blogs is basically INSANE now, isnt it? Arent all those Blogspots album posts what these low lifes (RIAA) are looking for?

    Arent Torrents next? Rapidshare? If Rapidshare caved in to the RIAA wouldnt thousands who have uploaded ANYTHING be vulnarable? Or are they out of the USA?

    Is IRC the safest corner of the web now? Relitively safe I mean…Aside from the darkside..those dang troublemakers! ;0)


  65. Jeunas
    October 5th, 2007 | 17:53


    “Oh my god, she broke the law and has to pay, how unfair! How dare the people who were stolen from prosecute… ”

    Actually, nothing’s been stolen. To be stolen the original content must be gone.
    Basically it comes down to this: It’s Ctrl+C – Ctrl+V, not Ctrl+X – Ctrl+V. :D

  66. ELCouz
    October 5th, 2007 | 17:53

    What about people who sell silvers ???
    They are making money of this … THEY are the real THIEFT!!!

  67. spiderpig
    October 5th, 2007 | 17:59

    Martin, interesting bit of tech news about a new PS3 being launched,


  68. reeged
    October 5th, 2007 | 18:02

    wow…the USA is a bad bad country.

  69. costa200
    October 5th, 2007 | 18:05

    So it is actually more economic to kill someone than share some songs in the US? How on earth did they get to that number for damage. How was the damage to the industry proven? Did they just pull that number out of the sky in a “big fine from hell to scare people” way?

    This must have been a mock of a trial…

  70. hikaricore
    October 5th, 2007 | 18:07

    costa200: Exactly. Imagine it as a Geico commercial:

    “I just saved a bunch of money by murdering my mother and not using p2p file sharing!”

  71. .hell//
    October 5th, 2007 | 18:17

    I agree with #20, who the heck uses Kazaa. I thought they were down or something. Like off line.

  72. blunden
    October 5th, 2007 | 18:26

    Jeunas: You are right. Unless the US has a messed legal system, copyright infringement has nothing to do with stealing. That’s just what people with no knowledge of the law says since that is what the RIAA and the likes keeps saying.

    ElCouz: Agreed. They should go after people who makes money on it.

  73. me
    October 5th, 2007 | 18:40

    LMAO 1700 TRACKS ONLY? gets 220k , my image of america is getting worst everyday what stupid people are in front of that country

  74. slapdash
    October 5th, 2007 | 18:42

    luckily i’m not live in “america”

  75. QuadrupelQ
    October 5th, 2007 | 18:53

    This was bound to happen, I can’t understand all the “WTF???” reactions. If course there would be some judge somewhere who would agree with the RIAA at some point. And now it happened, just like some judge has declared that people who burn THEMSELVES on hot coffee get an insane amount of money from the company they bought it from (they shouldn’t make the coffee that hot).

    The whole justice system is screwy. On one side it should protect and help us, but the next minute it’s doing you in the azz.

  76. Rekrul
    October 5th, 2007 | 19:07


    File sharing is using a program like Bittorrent, Kazaa, eMule, etc. It connects users directly together, so that files are transferred from user to user, or “peer to peer”. A major feature of all of these is that it usually isn’t possible to download, without also uploading parts of the files at the same time. Rapidshare is strictly downloading. Besides the fact that it would be much harder for the RIAA/MPAA to find out who has been downloading files from Rapidshare, it wouldn’t be worth their time to try and sue people who only download, but not upload. So downloading from Rapidshare is pretty safe.

    As for the trial;

    I read that the main point RIAA/MPAA has been using is a verdict from a judge that just making the files available over P2P counts as infringement whether any downloading actually took place or not. The judge in that particular case “vacated” that verdict, which some blogs seem to think means that this particular case should be thrown out, since it was the core reason she was convicted.

  77. philly
    October 5th, 2007 | 19:39

    Rekrul- Thats what seems to be the issue; uploading. You think Rapidshare customers are safe?

    What about seeding torrents? It appears seeding is illegal, how safe is a seeder compared to someone sharing on (seeding) sharing on Kazaa’s network??

    Again, what does everyone think of IRC? The RIAA couldnt possibly attack that world, right?

  78. mr.Floppy
    October 5th, 2007 | 19:50

    Thank god this witch hunting hasn’t reached Greece and the EU in general..YET.. For faks sake…Pay 200k for 26 songs :S
    I think the world needs a tyler durden to blow the riia or major record companies sky high…

  79. b513a
    October 5th, 2007 | 20:14

    i feel an uprising among the people. . .

  80. TupaC
    October 5th, 2007 | 20:39

    Omg omg bad luck for this girl.
    Btw keep head up and still using PG2.

    Thanks for the photo :)

  81. Donteanal
    October 5th, 2007 | 20:44

    RIAA’s next target – People who borrow DVD’s from friends without paying! COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT!

    I agree with the guy that for something to be stolen it has to be gone, the fact of the matter is, alot of these lawsuits are based on really loose laws BS laws about whats right and wrong, obviously these laws didn’t excist 10 years ago so someone had to come up with this crap.

    But hey thats America, hell she shoulda said the RIAA was obstructing her “pursuit of happiness” and counter sue them for breaking that law!

    (What a dumb law is that? “if you stop someone from trying to be happy, you will be punished by the law!”)

  82. sango
    October 5th, 2007 | 21:09

    they were able (riaa mpaa) to convince the canadian government that cam copies
    originating from canadian cinema were the main sources for movies pirating..

    the worse is that many peoples bought that story

    man is greedy and makes the law,money rules,if loosing money the law
    can change that

  83. sango
    October 5th, 2007 | 21:20

    i have a dutch article about this subject,but since many dutch native words are
    on the list of block words if thinking of them has english words

    well back to the cafe :) and the french drugstore for an aspirin

  84. LucidHarmony
    October 5th, 2007 | 21:32

    This is horribly unjust, those bastards don’t need her money. I

  85. killawife
    October 5th, 2007 | 21:42

    Once again, justice has been served. NOT! Sharing is supposed to be a good thing, not illegal. Sadly, this won’t change unless the system changes dramtically. And it won’t.

  86. Brian
    October 5th, 2007 | 22:10

    Hey i live in Canada and i have never heard of anyone being sued why? is there any laws in canada about downloading mp3′s? Or Movies/?

  87. omg
    October 5th, 2007 | 22:45

    theres no way sharing files can be worse then rape…

    oh wait they just made that happen..

    there will defenetly be a new trial, the judge must have been drunk or payed allowing this stuff without any kind of evidence at all..

  88. Canadian Bacon
    October 5th, 2007 | 22:49

    In Canada we have an easy “out” from any legal fight.. We’re charged a levy/tax on blank media.. So copy away since you’ve already compensated the artist!! :)


  89. sango
    October 5th, 2007 | 22:57

    interesting @89
    i have a dat-tape which means music on it is not legal,funny

  90. RickySlade
    October 5th, 2007 | 23:01

    Whoever calls “intellectual property laws” stupid, is stupid. without these laws innovation in all areas would grind to a halt and America would not longer be the greatest nation in the world. To all you America-bashers out there, remember you are stealing mostly american-made content. Why don’t you really make a statement and boycott the american culture that you and the rest of the world emulates? Just something to think about. The only thing that is ridiculous about this case is the settlement amount

  91. f00laid
    October 5th, 2007 | 23:12

    dude. that sucks. oh well… chances are you’re gonna lose to them even if you’re telling the truth. that sucks tho 220 grand.

  92. philly
    October 5th, 2007 | 23:20

    forget it…Its the begining of the end days.

    Prepare for battle and watch your A**!!

    Nas was right; soon Hip Hop will be illegal.

  93. Steve
    October 5th, 2007 | 23:44

    Wow … they won 200,000 and probably spent what? Several million in litigation? RIAA can stay inside the US. Here in Canada it’s legal to download and music sales are on an all time high.

    Congrats RIAA on killing the industry.

  94. sango
    October 5th, 2007 | 23:57

    @94 in comment 72 paste is an arcticle

    in short-some vp in music and video are wondering the cost versus the return
    some younger generation vp understand the phenomen better but still have
    a job to do.the riaa are such good salesman of themselves

  95. Luca
    October 6th, 2007 | 01:12

    Yeah, Canada rocks! The canadian dollar is stronger than the american one these days.

    USA has become a sad country … from wars to education, health care and immigration issues.

  96. warrenpeace
    October 6th, 2007 | 01:20


    yeah but we can pronounce the word “about”

  97. Banem
    October 6th, 2007 | 01:58

    Don’t worry much about it, this is just a show. One in a million? I will say one = nothing. As we hunt just some of our debtors (natural gas distribution company) and cut some of them of the lines just to show to the others what we can do. This have stronger psychological affect than anything else.

  98. JackSmack
    October 6th, 2007 | 01:59

    You idiots that say Peerguardian slows your download are wrong. The IP’s that PG blocks are sending bad data chunks anyways…..lol

  99. JackSmack
    October 6th, 2007 | 02:09


    Finally someone with some sense…..


    Yeah….The Canadian Healthcare system rocks….
    If it really worked the way its supposed to dont you
    think the US would have already implemented something
    similar? And at all you US-Bashers: Please stop.
    It isn’t our fault that we are the victim of a
    corrupt government…I mean, yeah, we voted, but
    everyone knows about the Diebold scandal and rigged
    elections….Think about it….is there anything we
    can do to save ourselves?

  100. Max
    October 6th, 2007 | 02:33

    To contribute to the debate, I’d just like to note that you all missed the fact that copyright infringement is NOT DOWNloading Music. If it is offered, you are free to take it without any penalty since it is, per se, open domain. Once you get to UPloading it, though, you are violating copyright laws since you are making an unauthorized copy of something which you spread around.
    Likewise, you are allowed to accept a gift CD as a present, but are not allowed to copy the CD and give it away.

    By the way, I highly doubt the cost of leading such a case allows the RIdoubleA to break even, even if they manage to get the woman to pay 220k. Also, she can still file bankruptcy, which most people confronted with these costs probably would have to do, and the RIAA would get nothing but have paid about half a million dollars only in law expenses. I don’t think they will make this a general strategy.

  101. tucker
    October 6th, 2007 | 02:43

    suddenly my 24.99/mo easynews account doesnt seem that costly afterall..

  102. sango
    October 6th, 2007 | 03:00

    Seppuku,and you will purify onself at the same time

  103. Darth Arcon
    October 6th, 2007 | 03:53

    There are currently a large number of powerful vocabulary words I would love to blurt out, but will not for fear of being banned…

  104. rapid
    October 6th, 2007 | 05:36

    I am sending an email to MPAA and RIAA to block rapidshare for US IP …This will help the MPAA and RIAA a lot…No more bruise

  105. Rekrul
    October 6th, 2007 | 06:06


    In my opinion, downloading from Rapidshare, whether as a free or premium user is safe, as is downloading from Usenet newsgroups. If you UPLOAD to RS or the newsgroups, you may get in trouble, but as I said before, it’s not worth the RIAA/MPAA’s time to go after someone who only downloads. They’d have millions of people to sue and without any uploads to pin on them, they’d have a much harder time getting a jury to convict them of anything meaningful.

    As for seeding, that’s another matter. If you’re using any kind of P2P software, you run the risk of getting caught. Blocklists can minimize that risk but not completely eliminate it. By downloading a file over P2P, you automatically make parts of it available and according to current court decisions, that amounts to committing copyright infringement. If you get caught…


    The original intent of Copyright was to ensure that an author had a limited period during which they could profit from their work before it passed into the public domain. The idea was to encourage authors to create by granting them the ability to profit from their work, but limit it so that eventually they would have to create something new or lose their source of income. The governments today have perverted that idea to the point where copyrights persist for up to 70-100 years after the death of the author. Disney is especially infuriating in this respect. Many of their movies are based on public domain works, but anytime one of their films is about to pass into the public domain, they run to the government and cry until they’re granted a ridiculous extension.

  106. philly
    October 6th, 2007 | 07:25

    Rekrul- Makes sense, both Rapidshare & seeding. Too many downloaders to chase down. Just about too many uploaders as well I imagine!

    Any insight on IRC? There should be many years before that world is known and vulnerable, right?

  107. RickySlade
    October 6th, 2007 | 18:35

    @ Rekrul
    Nobody is saying these laws, or recent decisions are perfect. I know they are flawed, in America and around the world, but the simple fact remains that they are more than necessary. Not only that, strict enforcement is necessary. I am in no way defending this court decision, just the principal. I’m sure there are examples around the developed world that parallel the decision. The problem is that people in America don’t sit around and pick apart the flaws of the rest of the world in such a way that the rest of the world does to us. Its probably just an attempt justify to themselves that the grass isn’t greener in America when in fact it is.

  108. RickySlade
    October 6th, 2007 | 18:36

    parallel the disney decision that is

  109. HorizonX
    October 7th, 2007 | 12:41

    Well she was guilty at least… they linked the handle used on kazaa to her identity (she used said handle in many other areas online) as well as providing evidence that no other MAC address was using her broadband modem to connect. Can’t imagine why she went to court :|

  110. Schuffee
    October 8th, 2007 | 00:39

    111 comments read and now I have a bad headake!

    Piracy will exist, allways…

    “If you dont have the cash, you download it” – Poor fellah

    Ok, thats about all I can comment atm.

  111. RickySlade
    October 8th, 2007 | 03:35

    You probably infringed on somebody else’s intellectual property when you cut and pasted that misguided diatribe. All kidding aside, human nature is rent-seeking behavior. You give humans too much credit. You vilify corporations and fail to take human nature into account. The Selfish Rent-seeking behavior of individuals. Your utopian society where everyone holds hands and works together simply would not happen. There is a reason why we need governments, police, and yes LAWs. I am a proponent of deregulation but you can’t be serious. Lets take movies as an example. Lets say they are all now free and you can legally download any movie. You can’t sit there and tell me that future movies would be up to the same standards as they are today (lets not get into a debate over this, you understand my point). There would be no more multi-million dollar budgets, because they would n’t make any money. people don’t do things for free. stuidos don’t make hit movies because of the love of film. They do it to make money.

  112. RickySlade
    October 8th, 2007 | 03:51

    humanity has already experimented with a system in which people do not get justly rewarded for hard work or good ideas. It’s called communism and that wasn’t very Vilfredo Pareto optimal either. Market Capitalism works, it’s a fact

  113. insect1
    October 11th, 2007 | 18:51

    are all these people that get sued using p2p.. havent heard of a case in which torrents were mentioned.

  114. blt
    October 13th, 2007 | 00:18

    RickySlade, you missed a point.
    The actual communist ‘system’ like Marx described it has never ever taken place in this world. All were totalitarian regimes which had/have nothing to do with communism at all, apart from the fact the the ideology and the word ‘communism’ have been used to seduce people into this totalitarian regime.

    Back on topic;
    What a bullsh*t, RIAA trying to scare people off. I wonder how many RIAA employees download themselves, or their families, or their friends..

  115. DJ DV8
    October 13th, 2007 | 03:20

    the actus reus of theft is usually defined as an unauthorised taking, keeping or using of another’s property which must be accompanied by a mens rea of dishonesty and/or the intent to permanently deprive the owner or the person with rightful possession of that property or its use.

    For example, if X goes to a restaurant and, by mistake, takes Y’s scarf instead of her own, she has physically deprived Y of the use of the property (which is the actus reus) but the mistake prevents X from forming the mens rea (i.e. because she believes that she is the owner, she is not dishonest and does not intend to deprive the “owner” of it) so no crime has been committed at this point. But if she realises the mistake when she gets home and could return the scarf to Y, she will steal the scarf if she dishonestly keeps it. Note that there may be civil liability for the torts of trespass to chattels or conversion in either eventuality.
    “Theft” – Wikipedia

    of course part of the problem is that historically property has been physical tangible unique, but now sending a copy doesn’t necessarily permanently deprive the original owner/possessor

    I do agree 100% with rslog’s position…imagine Galileo, Newton etc. seeking copyright protection for their ideas?

  116. RickySlade
    October 16th, 2007 | 06:08

    You’re right. It has not and will not. I believe marx also said that capitalism would eventually fail and there’s no sign of that happening anytime soon. While marx tells a beautiful story, the economics behind it does has been proven to not be solid. All modern economics is based on the fact that incentives matter. If you take incentives away bad things happen.

  117. Marenubium
    October 25th, 2007 | 17:49

    Lot of comments here, didn’t read all of them.
    First I’d like to say to all the lame, acusing, ‘na na na’ and ‘boontje komt om zijn loontje’ people here: if you’re new to filesharing, kazaa is one of the programs you’ll get in touch with if you are a newbie. Don’t judge those users, they don’t know any better. Kazaa will share files even if you’re not aware of it.
    I feel sorry for the lady in question.

    Second. Sharing copyrighted material over the internet is illegal in every country, but only the USA makes a big deal out of it (dutchie here).
    I wonder why :P

    Third. I’ve read some posts here about people who laughs at the poor woman but are proud of not sharing downloaded files. Well, get a life then and buzz off, ’cause this torrent-thingy over here will not survive without sharing. Nice knowing that there are people who still believe in hit and run and laughs at those who do not know much about P2P, torrents, filesharing etc.
    Thank you!!! NOT.

    Indeed, some people can’t afford buying movies/music although they want to. And guess what! They get in touch with programs like kazaa, napster, limewire, some lucky bastards find torrent programs and PG or friends. Don’t know a thing about it, but hey! They’ve got their movies and music!! Happily ever after..not..Suddenly they got sued.
    It’s not the file sharers this RIAA must go after; because that’s also a very lame thing.
    You catch my drift?

  118. Andrew Duggin
    October 26th, 2007 | 13:11

    $220K… Chit… I’d go to jail rather than give the RIAA and money.. either way you get screwed really hard….

  119. 4121
    November 25th, 2007 | 09:36

    I wonder if there could ever be a a “Possession of Illegally Obtained Intellectual Property” charge. And then maybe a “Distribution of . . .” charge. How about “Intent to Sell . . .” charge.

    Bah, who am I kidding . . . of course there will be.

  120. susana
    March 19th, 2008 | 19:23

    The entertainment industry is nothing but a media whore. Let’s see firt we bought vinly because nothing else was available. Then came the breakthrough of portable cassette players so we bought cassettes. Then came this totally new format called CD’s which had much better quality and did not break. FINALLY, downloads were introduced and so now all of the above forms are OBSOLUTE. Does this mean that we have to PAY 4 TIMES for the same music. How many times will we as consumers be squeezed by these companies trying to maintain their bottom line w/o any thought to people who LOVE music.
    Common sense dictates that if we buy the download it is OURS to do with as we please. WE OWN IT! Now what about these millions What about the vinyl, cassettes, cd’s that will end up in landfill, what about that? WHAT will the EPA do about that, hmmmm?

  121. Tona Harrington
    August 20th, 2014 | 23:31

    Hello! I just would like to give a huge thumbs up for the great info you have here on this post. I will be coming back to your blog for more soon.


Leave a reply


rent this ad space