RIAA heads to Court

[Billster]

Jammie Thomas of Minnesota is the first defendant in the RIAA file sharing lawsuits to refuse settlement and press on to a trial. Trial begins today. Local coverage. Alternate AP article.

 

But lawyers for the defendants say they've settled because trials cost tens of thousands of dollars. Thomas's lawyer, Brian Toder, said she was determined to fight. He declined to make her available for an interview. "She came into my office and was willing to pay a retainer of pretty much what they wanted to settle for,'' he said. "And if someone's willing to pay a lawyer rather than pay to make it go away, that says a lot.'' Thomas is at risk for a judgment of more than $1.2 million. The recording association is seeking damages set under federal law, of $750 to $30,000 for each copyright violation. "We repeatedly offer out-of-court settlements far less than what the law allows,'' Lamy said. The lawsuits aim to "communicate that there are consequences for breaking the law and encourage fans to turn to legal online services.''

 

"Lamy" is Jonathan Lamy, the RIAA mouthpiece.

 

Thomas is accused of violating the song owners' copyrights. Her lawyer says the record companies haven't even proved she shared the songs.

 

Toder, Thomas's attorney, plans to start with the basics - making them prove they own the songs at all.

 

Besides the dubious nature of the lawsuits in general, I think in this particular case the RIAA is bringing a knife to a gunfight.

[Uma Floresta]

 

RIAA heads to Court

 

 

I don't think they ever left.

[alphajerk]

people should sue the RIAA for putting out such {censored}ty music of late... teach them there are consequences for such crass commercialism.

[Cry Logic]

The RIAA puts out music?

That's news to me.....

[Frantag]

RIAA - 1

Illegal Downloaders - Revert to making cassette copies.

[LiveMusic]

She lost.

 

$220,000 judgment

 

I'm surprised she took that to court. In deep do-do now.

[Evai]

 

She lost.

 

 

Owned

[Billster]

 

She lost. $220,000 judgment

 

 

 

"Illegal downloads have "become business as usual. Nobody really thinks about it," said Cary Sherman, president of the Recording Industry Association of America, which coordinates the lawsuits. "This case has put it back in the news. Win or lose, people will understand that we are out there trying to protect our rights."

 

 

Again, without condoning illegal actions, exactly who's rights is the RIAA protecting? That quote there seems awfully possessive of the RIAA when the copyrights in fact are owned by the writers and publishers. IMO, the correct plaintiff would not be a recording-industry lobbying group, but a direct copyright holder. But the situation speaks to the record companies business model of modified indentured servitude where the real producers of the goods (writers and performers) hand over their rights to the distributors.

 

As for the specific case, the woman appears to have mounted an "ignorance defense" - I have no idea how those files ended up there! - she either lying or stupid, and either way it looks kind of pathetic. But individuals like this woman are not the real problem facing old-line record companies in the digital age.

 

I still want to know how the record companies themselves are the "copyright holders".

 

Local coverage.

 

 

Capitol Records Inc., Sony BMG Music Entertainment, Arista Records LLC, Interscope Records, Warner Bros. Records Inc. and UMG Recordings are the prevailing parties in the lawsuit against Jammie Thomas.

 

 

I mean everyone is familiar with how older recording artists never saw a dime of royalties because of the usurious contracts of the old days. Exactly what songs are we talking about here? How does the record company own the copyright? Is that ownership fair to the actual creator of the work? Are we talking about songs that reverted to the record company for some reason like the death of the author? Should the writer have some say in this? Should works pass into public domain before they end up as corporate assets? There's more at play than individual KaZaa users.

[ryan7585]

The record companies own your songs as soon as you sign to them.

 

just the way it works

[Super 8]

She must have hired Lionel Hutz.

[Billster]

 

The record companies own your songs as soon as you sign to them. just the way it works

 

 

That doesn't have to be "just the way it works". There are certainly artists who have managed to retain the rights to the work, despite working with the so-called major labels who distribute their recordings.

 

And after the various legal maneuverings of people like Prince, Tom Scholz, and Frank Zappa, who had to reclaim their works from bad contracts, can we get past the naivete of signing your life away in order to be a "rock star"? For sure it takes a lot of self-confidence to turn down a contract, but if you've got the goods, then somebody is going to agree to a fair business arrangement.

[ryan7585]

 

That doesn't have to be "just the way it works". There are certainly artists who have managed to retain the rights to the work, despite working with the so-called major labels who distribute their recordings. And after the various legal maneuverings of people like Prince, Tom Scholz, and Frank Zappa, who had to reclaim their works from bad contracts, can we get past the naivete of signing your life away in order to be a "rock star"? For sure it takes a lot of self-confidence to turn down a contract, but if you've got the goods, then somebody is going to agree to a fair business arrangement.

 

 

that's pretty irrelevant here, the record companies still own the songs. it was in the contract.

 

if you wont sign the contract that signs your life away, they'll just find someone that will. they make more money off talentless pretty teenage girls than anyone who ever "had the goods"

[Billster]

if you wont sign the contract that signs your life away, they'll just find someone that will. they make more money off talentless pretty teenage girls than anyone who ever "had the goods"

 

Perhaps, but I'll still have my life.

[ryan7585]

Perhaps, but I'll still have my life.

 

true

 

i wish it was worth the lifetime jail sentence to just kill off all the record company execs and form a new recording industry from the ground up. some kind of revolution is the only thing that could save modern music

[the-good-way]

 

That doesn't have to be "just the way it works". There are certainly artists who have managed to retain the rights to the work, despite working with the so-called major labels who distribute their recordings.

 

 

I believe Ryans initial response (and correct me Ryan, if I am misreading) was to the question

 

"How does the record company own the copyright?"

 

and was pointing out that, as property, one can sell the right, grant various forms of license, etc...which would be how the record company could come by ownership of copyright

 

And after the various legal maneuverings of people like Prince, Tom Scholz, and Frank Zappa, who had to reclaim their works from bad contracts.

 

That would be a second question more in the vein of business/contract law as opposed to IP law (we'd have to take a look at the individual case law to really get a full sense of what was at issue in each case -- anyone have Lexis or Westlaw access??)

[Dean Roddey]

It's now different than if you come up with a great idea at work. You don't get the money from that great idea, the company owns it unless you are willing to take the risk to go out on your own and try to create a company based on it. But of course people still work for companies and they still sign up with the big labels because it's probably still the best way to get to the big time, all of the talk about the internet to the contrary.

 

If you hit it big, then you'll have some weight to throw around and plenty of potential suitors when the next contract round comes up. Until then, you are giving up the ownership of the content in return for the services rendered to you by the studio. If you sign a contract that doesn't seem to your benefit later on when you are selling a lot of records, that's your fault. No one forced you to sign the contract.