Slyck.com
 
Slyck Chatbox - And More

RIAA's $222,000 verdict in Capitol v. Thomas set aside. Judge rejects 'making available'; attacks excessive damages

Discuss file-sharing news from other sites. Please submit stories for this forum here.
Forum rules
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Slyck Forum Rules

RIAA's $222,000 verdict in Capitol v. Thomas set aside. Judge rejects 'making available'; attacks excessive damages

Postby RayBeckerman » Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 pm

Story : http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/09/riaas-222000-verdict-in-ca

"The Court would be remiss if it did not take this opportunity to implore Congress to amend the Copyright Act to address liability and damages in peer to peer network cases such as the one currently before this Court."



RayBeckerman
 
Posts: 310
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 12:23 pm
Location: Forest Hills, NY

Re: RIAA's $222,000 verdict in Capitol v. Thomas set aside. Judg

Postby Maestro120 » Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:36 pm

Great GREAT news. :toast:

Now hopefully she gets a competent lawyer this time around who would be able to give her decent advice and not let so many country bumpkins get on the jury.
Maestro120
 
Posts: 659
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:39 pm

Re: RIAA's $222,000 verdict in Capitol v. Thomas set aside. Judg

Postby MrFredPFL » Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:51 pm

outstanding. looking forward to reading the entire decision, but i like what i see so far :D
MrFredPFL
 
Posts: 14273
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 4:48 pm

Re: RIAA's $222,000 verdict in Capitol v. Thomas set aside. Judg

Postby Ashibael » Wed Sep 24, 2008 10:17 pm

Maestro120 wrote:Great GREAT news. :toast:

Now hopefully she gets a competent lawyer this time around who would be able to give her decent advice and not let so many country bumpkins get on the jury.


You have that right. Really, what you want on a tech trial like this, contrary to popular belief and stereotype, is a well-educated jury who owns computers and is on the internet, who knows how easy (as I do) it is to tap into someone else's internet (even if they don't have a wireless network) and make it appear that they are downloading stuff illegally when it is not really them.
Ashibael
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:11 am

Re: RIAA's $222,000 verdict in Capitol v. Thomas set aside. Judg

Postby MrFredPFL » Wed Sep 24, 2008 10:31 pm

do you honestly believe she didn't do it? that a hacker happened to use the same name on kazaa that she uses for her personal email?

this is not about whether or not she did it - it's about the insanity of the statutory damages for what she did.
MrFredPFL
 
Posts: 14273
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 4:48 pm

Re: RIAA's $222,000 verdict in Capitol v. Thomas set aside. Judg

Postby piXelatedEmpire » Thu Sep 25, 2008 12:10 am

a win for sanity :toast:
Ross Wheeler, CEO of Albury.net.au, referring to the Australian Governments internet filtering plan wrote:"It's the most ill-conceived pile of stupidity by the biggest bunch of cretins that I've ever seen in my life"
piXelatedEmpire
 
Posts: 4680
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 4:45 pm
Location: ESPNs NBA page

Re: RIAA's $222,000 verdict in Capitol v. Thomas set aside. Judg

Postby Downloader » Thu Sep 25, 2008 12:14 am

MrFredPFL wrote:that a hacker happened to use the same name on kazaa that she uses for her personal email?


No, but maybe after gaining control of the machine he simply used her kazaa to d/l the files locally and then picked them up at his/her convenience. I know it's not probable that those events happened but it is possible.
SwordOfZork wrote:Just because you CAN sue someone, doesn't mean you're not a total douche for doing so.
User avatar
Downloader
 
Posts: 572
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 5:41 am
Location: The Internet


Return to File-Sharing News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

© 2001-2008 Slyck.com