Members Billster Posted October 28, 2008 Members Share Posted October 28, 2008 In case you missed it while waiting for the apocalypse... September 24: Judge overturns jury verdict in file sharing case A federal judge on Wednesday set aside the nation's first and only federal jury verdict against a peer-to-peer file sharer for distributing copyrighted music on a peer-to-peer network without the labels' authorization.U.S. District Judge Michael Davis of Duluth, Minnesota, declared a mistrial in the case of Jammie Thomas, a Minnesota mother of three, setting aside the $222,000 penalty levied by a federal jury last year for copyright infringement -- $9,250 for each of the 24 infringing music tracks she made publicly available on the Kazaa file sharing network. Davis had instructed (.pdf) the jury last year that the recording industry did not have to prove anybody downloaded the songs from Thomas' open Kazaa share folder. Davis read Jury Instruction No. 15 to jurors saying they could find unauthorized distribution -- copyright infringement -- if Thomas was "making copyrighted sound recordings available" over a peer-to-peer network "regardless of whether actual distribution has been shown."But Davis had second thoughts and, without any urging from the litigants in the case, summoned the parties back to his courtroom in August, writing in a brief order that he may have committed a "manifest error of the law." He heard arguments from both sides and said he would issue a ruling soon.With Wednesday's opinion, Davis made his revised position official and ordered a retrial -- one with different jury instructions."Jury Instruction No. 15 was erroneous, and that error substantially prejudiced Thomas' rights. Based on the court's error in instructing the jury, it grants Thomas a new trial," the judge ruled (.pdf). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Will Chen Posted October 28, 2008 Members Share Posted October 28, 2008 Interesting turn of events! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members FireWithin Posted October 28, 2008 Members Share Posted October 28, 2008 so stealing is ok now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted October 28, 2008 Members Share Posted October 28, 2008 No, but possibly prejudicing a jury is not okay. As I read it (I'm not a lawyer), suppose someone downloads copyrighted material but has second thoughts, decides it's wrong, and doesn't distribute. Under the previous instructions to the jury, that would still be a crime. Perhaps with the modified instructions, it wouldn't be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members slight-return Posted October 28, 2008 Members Share Posted October 28, 2008 WOW!!!! I'm shocked....that the reporter actually included some court documentation(you guys know it's a pet peeve of mine) No, it doesn't make stealing legal (it looks to be civil not crim case anyway)Keep in mind guys, this was a mistrial -- verdict was vacated and the case is going to be retried Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted October 28, 2008 Members Share Posted October 28, 2008 ...and the case is going to be retried Maybe, maybe not. We'll see if the RIAA is all that gung-ho about going after her again. They've probably been more hurt by the bad public reaction to the court cases than they would gain by re-trying and winning this one case. We'll see, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members slight-return Posted October 28, 2008 Members Share Posted October 28, 2008 Looks like motion for retrial was already granted. Could get dropped but the RIAA may have to use this as a platform to butt up against the "made available" v "actual distribution" problem. I'm kinda wondering if they will incur any more negative sentiment on this case or not I really don't know In some ways I figure the damage has alread been done in terms of public perception in this case and this particular one isn't that fresh..the public may need a new face to get all worked up again. eh, see how it plays out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members philbo Posted October 28, 2008 Members Share Posted October 28, 2008 At this point, the RIAA can't do a lot to tarnish their reputation any further - - They've already screwed the pooch on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Actually, it wouldn't make any difference what they do, since most people just kneejerk assume they are evil anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jotown Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 The RIAA has certainly done a bad PR job for itself, but as I watch what used to be the record business morph into the black hole that it has become I can only wish that more people were getting it when it mattered. Now that a whole generation of kids (and a lot of adults) don't buy music as it is so much easier to steal it. (And hey; everybody does it) It's too late to do anything about it now. I have done surveys of 20 somethings at my gigs and most of them cannot remember the last time they bought a CD (or paid for a download). Yeah. The RIAA was stupid. But it is too late to fix the broken dam now . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sventvkg Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Screw the RIAA and their tactics of alienating the few people left who do pay for music. The only way people will start getting paid again is if they build royalties into ISP costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Music Calgary Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 so stealing is ok now? Yes. That's precisely what is being said here. Excellent deduction. Actually, it wouldn't make any difference what they do, since most people just kneejerk assume they are evil anyway. Baloney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members slight-return Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 It's a civil case dudes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.