A downloaded music case goes to court UPDATE

You had to join the lawsuit on this web site which hardly anyone knew about, Pastor.

I, in fact, did receive a check from that settlement. It was less than $20, but it was better than nothing.

 

Next time I steal six shirts from Macy's I'll just tell them that I wouldn't have purchased any more than three, anyway, and if like the shirts I might come back and actually buy some. That should get me off.

 

Except, of course, Macy's is out six shirts, and in the downloading case there is no actual loss for the recording company.

 

intellectual property
–noun
Law. property that results from original creative thought, as patents, copyright material, and trademarks.

There is an actual loss to the owner of the rights. Intellectual property, by definition, has ownership and value. When intellectual property is stolen (and distributed) it becomes devalued because of the increase in supply vs. demand.

 

Now she owes nearly $2m:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_tec_music_downloading

 

And now we are at $1.5 million. Could have been a little less:

A federal jury on Wednesday ordered Thomas-Rasset to pay $62,500 for each of 24 songs she illegally downloaded through an online file-sharing program. That adds up to $1.5 million.

The verdict followed the third trial in three years for Thomas-Rasset and proved especially expensive. A few months ago, the Recording Industry of America (RIAA) offered to settle with the mother of four for $25,000, to be paid to a music charity. She refused.

http://www.startribune.com/local/106654868.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4OW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUac8HEaDiaMDCinchO7DUs