Jury Rules Against Minn. Woman In Download Case

This is nuts. And for only 24 songs...


What kind of jury awards $80,000/song?!? Ridiculous

I wonder who gets the $80,000, the artist or the local governement?

The RIAA stated recently that they will no longer seek prosecution in these cases because they got the point that it is illegal to download copyrighted material.  Either that, or they were tired of losing all their battles against dead women, toddlers, and mothers who do not even own a computer.

More importantly, how much gets back to the artist rather than the lawyers. I'm guessing not much.....

So if you walk into Walmart and steal a CD, you have stolen it, and no one else can have that CD. The punishment is basically a slap on the wrist.

If you go online and download the CD you have stolen it, but you aren't preventing someone from purchasing it. Punishment of $80k per song?

In both cases you have stolen the CD, in the first case you have taken something and it may not be sold again. I would see the first case as much worse.

Anyone else see this an incongruous?

Timmedin,

I agree with your logic, the problem the authorities have is that few (I think) people would consider stealing a physical product from a store but many (again, guessing) have no problem with downloading something due to the percieved no harm/no risk nature of the crime. Therefore the punishment needs to be more secure to act as deterent.

Doesn't mean I agree with it, but you can see the reasoning behind it.

I am not saying this is right, because it isn't, but it seems extreme getting fined $80,000 for something that costs $1.

I don't disagree with you there. My point is that this seems excessive for downloading (she was not convicted of sharing/uploading). I don't get how downloading the song is so much worse than stealing the CD from Walmart.

If you steal one CD in Minnesota you can't be fined more than $1,000.
https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=609.52
2008 Minnesota Statutes - 609.52 THEFT.
"where the value of the property or services stolen is $500 or less, to imprisonment for not more than 90 days or to payment of a fine of not more than $1,000, or both"

If you stole an entire CD (12 songs) from Walmart you receive up to a $1,000 fine, but if you downloaded the same CD you would receive a fine of $1Million ($80,000 x 12). A 1000 to 1 ratio seems ridiculous. Stealing the CD from Walmart would me that you now have access to the copyrighted cover art too.

Follow the money, that is the sad part in this whole thing. They say it is for the artists but none of the money is. The artists are even thinking about filing their own lawsuit against the RIAA.
http://torrentfreak.com/riaa-keeps-settlement-money-080228/

Depending on the "them" in this sentence. I assume you mean RIAA and
I would disagree with that point since I don't believe that is their goal (my opinion).

The only one who benefits from the lawsuits is the RIAA, and if all the lawsuits stopped then the RIAA wouldn't have an income stream and they would dry up. If I were the lawyers for the RIAA I would definitely tell them it is a good idea to continue with the lawsuits, I would get to keep my job then.

Note: I do NOT believe that downloading music like this is right, I just think it isn't being handled properly.