Thomas Seeks New Lawyer to Appeal the RIAA

Ben Jones
January 1, 2008
88
defense,
lawyer,
RIAA,
thomas
Print

Things seem to be going from bad to worse, for Minnesota’s Jammie Thomas. After incurring a hefty judgment in the October trial vs the RIAA, she is now having to look for new representation.

Jammie Thomas Campaign logo Thomas, served with a $222,000 judgment in October 2007 has recently published to her website, freejammie.com, that her existing lawyers, Brian Toder, and associates, will not be working on her appeal.

Some may see that as a mixed blessing. Toder, a maritime law specialist, was hardly the most appropriate choice of counsel, and this showed in a frankly lackluster non-existent defense.

Ms. Thomas explained to TorrentFreak why she initially chose Toder for the case “I had no idea who could represent me for my case and Mr. Toder was listed on another attorney’s weblog, Mr. Ray Beckerman, as being the attorney from Minnesota who handled cases such as mine.” she also said, “I feel Mr. Toder performed as best he could considering the financial situation I am in and how much I could afford to pay him and his firm.”

The notice on the website says that all the donations will still be used for her new defense: “She [Thomas] confirmed that the donations collected here are still going into her legal defense fund and will be used to finance her appeal. She is now in search of a capable attorney ready to take the appeal either pro bono or for what is raised through fundraising efforts.”

Donation details are at freejammie.com

Previous Post | Next Post

Follow @torrentfreak

Anonymous

The RIAA must have ruined here life with a fine like that. Shame on them. It’s not as if she songs she “stole” were worth $222,000! Disgusting.
JJ

wow
Anonymous

huh stupid asshole’s (RIAA go to HELL)
James.

Why doesn’t she contact EFF ?
MaximumFuzz

If You Think about the contrasting losses, the RIAA’s loss really pales into nothing compared to Jammies. Jammie has just lost pretty much her whole life, all her monetary plans and life visions, I mean, who CAN afford to lose over 200k? IN comparison, the RIAA has lost 24 songs in sales.
The resounding message is clear.
FUCK OFF RIAA.
You’re not making any new friends, and you’re losing all your old ones.
Anonymous

[quote]IN comparison, the RIAA has lost 24 songs in sales.[/quote]

They didn’t even loose that – they just didn’t gain it like they expected/hoped.

It’s absolutely insane that they expect that RUINING PEOPLE’S LIVES is going to bring their profits up – even more insane that they are willing to do so for their profits.

Come on people – pirate more.
Anonymous

Hope she gets a normal jury and not some stoneage incompitent farmer roughnecks that was biased from the start..
oh and a lawyer that provides defence..
Torgrim

This case is incredibly ugly, there is no way she deserves this huge fine. I donated $100 to her back in October, and I hope it goes well for her. But the legal system in the US seems to be a nightmare, so I don’t know how much hope there is.

So all I can say is: Let’s boycott these scumbags, I haven’t bought anything from the RIAA-labels for the last 5 years. If enough people stop buying their releases, they will go out of business and thus not be able to ruin any more lives.

I look forward to the day most music is released directly by the artists, that is the only model I am willing to support.

Thankyou.
Sickness

[quote comment="253544"]FUCK OFF RIAA.
You’re not making any new friends, and you’re losing all your old ones.[/quote]

Yup.
This is just another step towards metaphorical death for the RIAA, their methods get them NOWHERE..

And if they don’t stop, they should at least come to a decision (somehow) similar to “If you can’t beat them, join them” – and the first bit is definitely not going to happen.
brap

“f enough people stop buying their releases, they will go out of business and thus not be able to ruin any more lives.”
no your wrong, they will make less money and sue more people so they make more money
Malarkey

It’s ridiculous to contrast RIAA loses versus gains or talk about whether she “deserved” this fine. It’s like you people have no concept of property rights. Life isn’r fair children. Sharing is “stealing” and if you don’t like it, write a letter to your congressman. You can’t justify taking someone’s property just because they’re rich. I think some of you people have watched Robin Hood too many times.
James.

No point writing to congressmen, they’re all bought and sold already.

Sucks to be in America. Feel sorry for you Americans out there.

You should all rise and demand a Democratic system.
RIAA enemy

RIAA is crowd of sick corrupt dude. You can’t talk with the “company” on a human behavior. Money, money and more money is the only thing RIAA care about. As long RIAA assfuckers is not dead nothing will change.
Malarkey

Money Money Money is the American way. That’s the concern of every company and industry. I don’t understand where all the hate comes from? You guys hate the RIAA because you don’t want to pay for music?
Malarkey

Money Money Money is the American way. That’s the concern of every company and industry. I don’t understand where all the hate comes from. You guys hate the RIAA because you don’t want to pay for music?
James.

[quote comment="253596"]Money Money Money is the American way. That’s the concern of every company and industry. I don’t understand where all the hate comes from. You guys hate the RIAA because you don’t want to pay for music?[/quote]

It’s not people don’t want to pay for music, they do. They just want to be RIPPED OFF!

And who gives a shit about the American way. It’s over for America, your economy is dying.
Anonymous

The only difference between the devil and the riaa is that the devil asks for a contract before he takes your soul.
Anonymous

[quote comment="253596"]Money Money Money is the American way. That’s the concern of every company and industry. I don’t understand where all the hate comes from. You guys hate the RIAA because you don’t want to pay for music?[/quote]

That’s right. Spreading culture should be free. Fuck you, and fuck RIAA.
JimmyX

I’m sorry Malarkey, but I beleive you are wrong.

We hate the RIAA because they are talentless middlemen who will do anything to hold on to their lucrative monopoly. They do not care about music at all, their only interest is in further lining their own pockets. They want us to pay repeatedly for the same content over and over again. They are buying politicians, they are buying laws, and they have no respect for an individual’s fair-use rights. Having bought the politicians, they are now getting the US government to attempt to strong-arm other countries into adhering to the RIAA’s rules by withholding entry to the WTO. Globalisation is great when it benefits the corporations and their share prices, but when it benefits the consumer they are up in arms – for example the case of CD Wow selling out of Hong Kong to the UK and the resultant court case taken by the record label’s body in England. I say fuck them, they have been ripping us off for years and now it’s payback time.
die RIAA

To the commenter above, people hate the RIAA because they ruin peoples lives by abusing the court system with predatory litigation that relies on the ignorance of the justice system instead of it’s own merits. It seems most people understand that but I guess it must be over your head.

Those who equate sharing with stealing are fucking retarded. There is no property taken you dumb shits.

Who gives a crap anyways, the corporate media industries have one foot in the grave, just read their SEC filings. Soon they will have gotten their last drop from the sheeple and will have to go shove a thumb up their ass and sit in the corner while the rest of the economy leaves them behind.

They don’t have a choice anyways, anonymous P2P solutions are gaining new users every day. Once fully adopted, nobody will have to worry about these bullshit lawsuits.

If you want to make a living by commercialization of creative expression, you’d better start looking for another career now. There will always be people who create music, whether for pay or not. The only loss we’ll see is commercial fad pop garbage like Britany Spears and whoever else is the latest fap trophy of the week. Good riddance.
die RIAA

by ‘commenter above’ I meant #14 BTW
Punk

ask the eff.org for some lawyer reccomendations! pfff dummies
Anonymous

[quote]Life isn’r fair children. [/quote]

Why just dismiss something that is wrong so easily?

Maybe I’ll use the government to steal 200,000$ from you – you’ll protest, so will others – I’ll dismiss that with “life’s not fair”.

[quote]Sharing is “stealing” and if you don’t like it, write a letter to your congressman. [/quote]

Sharing is not stealing – sharing as a definition, no government can change it.

You have no concept of freedom, child.

[quote]You guys hate the RIAA because you don’t want to pay for music?[/quote]

I hate the RIAA because they persecute people for sharing and ruin lives.
hiro81

[quote comment="253612"]I’m sorry Malarkey, but I beleive you are wrong.

We hate the RIAA because they are talentless middlemen who will do anything to hold on to their lucrative monopoly. They do not care about music at all, their only interest is in further lining their own pockets. They want us to pay repeatedly for the same content over and over again. They are buying politicians, they are buying laws, and they have no respect for an individual’s fair-use rights.[/quote]

Your newsletter, I want to subscribe… xD
Rekrul

The content creators have fought tooth and nail to oppose every new technological advance that comes along. If they’d had their way, we wouldn’t have VCRs, DVRs, recordable CDs or DVDs. We wouldn’t even have cassettes. They found that they couldn’t stop file sharing, so now they’re trying to sue it out of existance.

$220,000 for a couple dozen songs is ridiculous. No matter how wrong it may have been, there is no way that their “losses” came anywhere near that much. I seem to recall that she was convicted of sharing 24 songs. If you figure that it costs $1 to download a song from iTunes, and you estimate that every song was downloaded 100 times, that puts their losses at $2,400. A much more realistic figure, especially considering that they have no idea how many times the songs were downloaded, or even IF they were downloaded from her system.

Consider the difference in buying a CD online and buying a song. To buy a CD, you go to Amazon.com or one of dozens of other retailers, place the order, pay a single price and you get your music (albeit, not immediately). To buy a song download, you usually have to join a monthly service, pay a monthly fee, install special software, pay for each song, download it in a special DRM crippled format, and you may or may not be able to burn it to CD, or transfer it to a portable music player. That’s IF the service has the songs you want.

Some companies are now selling DRM free songs, but the selection is still pretty slim compared to what’s available on the P2P networks, but it IS a step in the right direction.

Companies could put their entire catalog online for next to nothing and people would buy because it would be legal and risk-free. They’re just too scared of technology to do it.
system

“Some may see that as a mixed blessing. Toder, a maritime law specialist, was hardly the most appropriate choice of counsel”

Ah, but who better to deal with accusations of piracy on the high seas than a maritime lawyer. Ye landlubbers!

Methinks Jammie Thomas is an extremely confused person.
Mr.Loverman

This thread is funny :)
People fighting on why we hate the RIAA…. :)
Anonymous

Why should there be new laws and taxes for a industry thats obviously changing?
How can a industry get police powers and abillity to influence laws and taxes?
“Normal” industries adapt or die, however movie and music industry are defyently fighting against industry revolution.
Just as say employers fought against the unions and justice for workers. They wanted slaves, just like the movie/music industry wants.
They want to trap consumers, create mini monopolies for cash flow and make laws and regulations so they can do it forever.

Im helping to change a industry thats corrupted and sick to something better. Either it dies in the process and a new industry arrise like the normal process or it goes so far that people die for our rights to print a book, like the printing revolution.
Did anyone believe the world never change?
Entertainment production and distribution that got digitalized have moved to the internet or is in process of moving.
In fear we got old laws to apply for internet, we got intellectual property laws, millenium act etc.
All just to keep a industry from dying a natural death.
People who printed books were once hunted, but thanx to their defyence and the peoples will, in the end we got to read the news every morning.
The newspapers adapted, their on the internet now for free (well most).
News no longer costs, why cant music be the same? Why cant creativity be free? Distribution is already as free as it can get thanx to Bittorrent.

I will never think i am doing something wrong, the ones who are doing wrong is the industry and the ones who support the industry.
Content creators do no longer need the industry, should the industry be allowed to force a need?
Believe in propaganda all you want, id say you would be fools. Either fight for your rights or be enslaved, let history teach you.
Do not let them make laws, do not let them get away with things, do not be blind and believe their propaganda.
Do not give up rights of many for benefit of a few.
Yes im wasted :)
Malarkey

Yea I haven’t read any reasons here. It’s all just idealistic prattle. What should or what shouldn’t be without any concrete reasons is just rubbish. It’s retarded you people make a distinction between the RIAA and the music industry, as if the RIAA doesn’t represent and solely exist to enforce the music industries agenda. The music industry as a whole is to blame for this situation. The RIAA isn’t some independent organization that exists to profit for its own self. “They” are the must industry. This hatred towards the RIAA for “stealing” from people and ruining their lives is brainless. The RIAA didn’t steal or ruin anyone’s life, the justice system did. The courts determine and enforce these judgments. Why don’t you put this energy into forming interest groups to lobby congressmen and senators, or fighting the reelection campaigns of judges that judge in favor of anti-p2p legislation? And this concept that industries and corporations exists for the consumer is completely deluded. I don’t know if it’s just ignorance of how the American system functions, or just disgust with it? Every industry in America has politicians in its pocket and laws made in its favor. Also, did you not read that the judgment of 220k was hoped to dissuade others from downloading. Judgments are made to award a monetary sum and to serve as a warning to others. You children need to stop living in the world that should be, and focus on the world that is. America was founded with a strong sense of property rights, not “fair use”. You people should have learned in kindergarten that life isn’t fair.
DakE_FeatH

1. Sharing is NOT stealing! Let me ask you a question Mr. “Malarkey”, have you ever lent a friend a CD with music? I mean original CD that you bought, of course. Have you ever borrowed an original CD with music from a friend? Or did such with a DVD that you bought, or videocasette? See, thats sharing. It’s the same thing, only now it’s done online. Instead of me walking to a friend’s house to ask for the movie/song, I request permission online. He gives permission, resulting in sharing. Which is … something that exists since the beginning of mankind.

2. Again, it’s NOT stealing. It’s not like a movie is plagiarized on the internet. For example, if John Smith releases a song “The Best Damn Song”, it goes on the net. Then the song is downloaded 500,000 times. Do you see the title of the song “The Best Damn Song” with another artist’s name attached? NO. Moreover, John Smith benefits from a larger audience, because he is a new singer. He is planning to have a concert in 6 months, but before he released “The Best Damn Song” he was unknown. Now at least 500,000 people heard about him, and they liked his stuff. So now a lot of people go to his concert. It helps the author to gain both popularity and money. The only party who doesn’t benefit is RIAA/MPAA/CIAD or whatever their names are.

Any questions?
DakE_FeatH

Oh yeah, 1 more thing.

I watch movies in theatres. Take Spider-man 3. I watched it soon after its release on the big screen. I PAID for the movie. And I liked it a lot. So tell me if you please, WHY should I pay another $30-$50 in order to get it on a DVD now? What’s wrong in downloading something I already paid for?
http://neuron2neuron.blogspot.com Ben Jones

[quote comment="253697"] It’s retarded you people make a distinction between the RIAA and the music industry, as if the RIAA doesn’t represent and solely exist to enforce the music industries agenda. The music industry as a whole is to blame for this situation. The RIAA isn’t some independent organization that exists to profit for its own self. “They” are the must industry.[/quote]
Nope, they are not ‘the music industry’, they are ‘the 4 main record companies’. Its a distinction frowned upon by the RIAA. They do not represent the artists, or the songwriters. They represent the suits, the middlemen. Next you’ll be teling me that the MPAA represents the Film industry too, opposed to the major studios. If they did, there’d be no writers strike.
Malarkey

Paying for the movie in one medium doesn’t mean you’re entitled to it in every other medium. That’s like buying a burger at one McDonald’s and thinking you’re entitled to one at every other McDonald’s. I don’t lend things to people; I make a copy and give it to them. And whether the RIAA represents every company in the industry or just the important ones isn’t relevant. The RIAA constitutes enough companies to represent a majority of the industry. The RIAA may not directly represent that artists or songwriters, but the suits and middlemen represent the artists and songwriters. So either way the RIAA serves their interests. I realize p2p helps little known or unknown artists get their name out there, but that doesn’t mean it helps sales for known artists. It’s easy to say “I would pay for it if it were cheaper”, or whatever the fuck, but its not. So just steal it, admit its stealing, and continue on your merry way. I don’t understand why you people need to justify stealing someone’s property by claiming is sharing or they can afford it or its wrong or waaa it’s not fair. Why can’t the concept of stealing just be embraced?! You pseudo-revolutionaries need to get off your high horse stop thinking you’re some kinda new age Thomas Paine.
otherside

I too hate what the RIAA is doing and their methods. But they are within their rights based on our outdated laws. And just to note that it was the jury that decided the penalty of 200k, not the judge or the RIAA. Now that’s fugd. How did a room full of people who probably have no industry knowledge let alone technical knowledge come up with that? Must have been the same group in the McDonalds coffee crotch incident. Our country IS out of control and we need to take it back. I agree with the above poster…put your efforts into tangibles rather than online rants. Write you congressmen, write the RIAA/MPAA, hell write you favorite artists and tell them the end is nigh. We won’t stand for this much longer.
I wonder if someone could persuade the artist whose songs she ‘stole’ to pay the judgment for her. That would be feking classic. Maybe Trent Reznor would step up?
Xanna

Sorry for interrupt, but more terrible news:

http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14490
Anonymous

I think we should have a civil war.

This is all happening because of Bush and Clinton.

Bush is a war criminal, breaking constitutional laws, breaking the Geneva Conventions, taking bribes for passing bills, and manslaughter on a large scale.

He should get the death penalty for all the crimes against America, crimes against Humanity, and for TREASON.

Yes Bush has commit treason. He works to destroy America.

He wants the elite to be powerful and happy.

In fact Having a civil war is the most Patriotic thing we can do cause Bush hates freedom fighters (fighters fighting for freedom) and hes against freedom.

Bush is a Political Criminal.
Anonymous

WE Need to fight a civil war, no matter what the costs are.

We need revolution, if Ron Paul, isn’t elected then we need to fight this government cause the constitution or Deceleration of I. said we should try to change our corrupt corporate government or Abolish it to to the ground.
Anonymous

[quote comment="253610"]The only difference between the devil and the riaa is that the devil asks for a contract before he takes your soul.[/quote]

actually they do contracts to artists thats why they can’t share music for free and so we have to pirate it.

The RIAA is the devil.
Blacklotus

America’s society is a crumbling sanctuary which will soon fall on its self if we Americans do not do something about it. It is this type of business practice which cripples our society and for which I do not support the RIAA any and other group like them. I agree with many people here that are against the RIAA and there decisions and reasons why they are against them.

As for Malarkey, I think you need to do much more research into why RIAA and other industries like them are hurting the consumers and the artists. The RIAA does hurt the artist more when suing the fans that enjoy the music. IF the music industry as a whole would actually put something out there that people would enjoy instead of blaming p2p as the root cause of everything. Then I think they wouldn’t have so much of a problem.

Ok Malarkey I have a question for you. If you were a song writer and the RIAA started suing your fans because they shared your music and you get free publicity by the consumer for sharing a song with another. How would you feel that your fan that enjoyed your music or a person who found your song by having it shared is being sued? The image alone for being sued by the very artist that you liked will no longer have the value it once did.

Also for talking to our lobbyist’s, I think you need to understand a little economics. Right now our society is running off of laws created by businesses that have monopoly. Look at the RIAA, MPAA, and even ongoing cable giants like Comcast and others. They are the ones that want to change the laws for their own bidding. To give them free range to do anything. Mr malarkey I think you are fighting a losing battle though I am always up for a good debate.
Anon

We were always taught that sharing is the right thing to do.

Why has that changed?

What has happened to the moral fabric of our country?

WHY CAN’T I FUCKING SHARE WITH PEOPLE ANYMORE WITHOUT SOMEONE CALLING IT STEALING?

RIAA: THEY HATE SHARING. THEY HATE AMERICA. AND THEY ESPECIALLY HATE ANYONE WHO SAYS THAT SHARING IS CARING. SO THEY HATE CHILDREN. AND CHILDREN’S TV. AND GOOD PEOPLE EVERYWHERE.
Blacklotus

Anon, America is run off of greed. People don’t have enough money. It comes to a point of how much is enough.

I agree with you Networking in general was created to share files from one location to another. Also to communicate to other people. In America if you your not making money off of something it’s easy to put a blame on something else. What these industries need to understand is why was the internet created in the first dam place. The reason why they hate it is because they aren’t making money off a great concept to address thousands of people at onces
Malarkey

All you people who talk about civil wars and revolutions are retarded. The president is a puppet of the party. Realize there are three branches of government; the executive is only one of them. The congress and senate hold more responsibility for what’s going on than the President. The president represents the party, he is their tool. You think the president is chosen to be the representative of the party, is elected to office, and then just gets to do whatever he wants?! All this talk about his supposed crimes is moronic. The majority of the government is complicit, and has to be for “his” decisions to have any effect. And Blacklotus, you talk about how our society is now run by industries and monopolies influencing government, I think you need to read a history book. There hasn’t been a division between economics and government since the nation’s inception. Also, your question about my fan getting sued, I say GOOD! The fan is a customer, I’m in it for the money and the customer stole from me. Sharing isn’t sharing if you don’t have the other person’s permission, its STEALING! Snap out of your communist fantasy and realize America is a country of laws that protects property and business practices. I don’t even know why I’m arguing about this. I’m downloading as I type this. It just vexes me none the responders seem to grasp the concept of property rights, or stealing, and this idiotic idealism?! WTF
KungfuTornado

You know one thing that never seems to get mentioned when th recording industry is talking about loss of income is that a lot of people are boycotting them already.

I’m never going to buy a music CD ever again, or DVD for that matter. That goes for my family and many friends also.

The power is in the consumer.

The recording industry should take this into consideration also before blaming it squarely on p2p.

I would recommend everyone not only rant here, but tell everyone you know. Don’t buy any DVD’s or CD’s until these morons are on their knees.

It’s also strange how the communism argument tends to pop up in these arguments. Communism in theory is actually a great system. It just takes afew greedy pricks to ruin it .

Finally, I don’t think Ron Paul will make it as president for you guys, if he becomes too much of a threat, the powers that be will sort something out. It’s the American way.
anon

The only thing I buy with my money are model kits since you can’t DL them.

Greed doesn’t just ruin communism, it ruins everything. Think democracy is good? ask the Russians right this moment if they prefer being rich with restricted liberties or starving.

Democracy is crap now that laws are decided by lobbyist and corporations flush with cash. A true democracy would have pirates dictating the law. We outnumber the corporations on the per-person count, but they outnumber us on a per-dollar count. Let’s all do our part in cutting down their cash reserves to make sharing and distribution of information truly free.
playdoh

Copyright infringement is NOT theft!!

Stop calling this stealing. Nothing was stolen here. There was no loss of property or anything of value.
KungfuTornado

[quote comment="253855"]Copyright infringement is NOT theft!!

Stop calling this stealing. Nothing was stolen here. There was no loss of property or anything of value.[/quote]

Very true.

It’s not stealing, and i agree anyone who calls it that deserves to be flamed.

Nothing of value has been taken away so it can’t be stealing .

I prefer to call it,

- Proactive redistribution of wealth –

LOL

Seriously though, to call it stealing is pretty pathetic.
WakuWaku

America is becoming the shame of the world.

And my country (NL) is just following it footsteps.
Sick, sick, sick.
KungfuTornado

That’s sad. The Netherlands used to be such a liberal place.
Anonymous

Well.. looks like Malaysia is also following America.. they are starting to sue downloaders now
Kevin

Malaysia? wtf? Probably ’cause you’re taking business from those 3 story retail stores selling nothing but pirated material.

Actually, anyone know how to go about getting intellectual property rights?

I want in on this money spinner too.

I’ll just shoot some pics. make some crappy music, dump it on the internet and sue.
Stage1

Definition of theft/stealing:

From http://www.dictionary.net/theft

“(Law) The act of stealing; specifically, the felonious taking and removing of personal property, with an intent to deprive the rightful owner of the same; larceny.

Note: To constitute theft there must be a taking without the owner’s consent, and it must be unlawful or felonious; every part of the property stolen must be removed, however slightly, from its former position; and it must be, at least momentarily, in the complete possession of the thief. See Larceny, and the Note under Robbery.”

I think “taking and removing of personal property” and “every part of the property stolen must be removed from its former position” should clearify…
Torgrim

[quote comment="253583"]no your wrong, they will make less money and sue more people so they make more money[/quote]
No, that is not how it works. The RIAA have themselves admitted that the lawsuits are _costing_ them money. The purpose of the sue-them-all campaign isn’t to make money, it is to scare people away from illegal downloading.

And Malarkey, you are right that the world isn’t fair, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be. With comments such as ‘the world isn’t fair’ and ‘you children need to stop living in the world that should be, and focus on the world that is’, you are basically saying that we should just accept what we perceive as wrong, instead of fighting it. That’s a horrible attitude. I say NO WAY, when you see something wrong, you should fight it.

In this case we do seem do have a real chance of getting rid of the major labels, or at least reduce them to an insignificant level. They have been reporting awful sales for several years now. And the boycott is really easy to uphold (I don’t listen to much music released by the major labels, and I download these few releases illegally), so why on earth shouldn’t I boycott the major labels (and urge others to do the same)?

Additionally, what makes you think we aren’t engaged in the politics? OF COURSE we are! I don’t live in the US, so it isn’t my place to write the congress, but I’m actively engaged here in my own country.
Scrooge

While Jammies case sucks fucking ass there is also a tiny little speck of hope here. The RIAA can sue as many people as the fucking like but each time they sue and win it puts one more nail in the casket of a industry watchdog that is already loathed by many artists in the biz today. Soon they, along with Randy Saff and all those other corporate shit eating fucks, will become nothing more than dinosaurs in this age of digital rebellion. Many artists are waking up to the fact that they don’t need people like this to run their fucking lives. They can sell directly to the consumer via the internet at a cheaper price and make a fucking amazing profit. There is already panic amongst the industry because the decline of the fat money grabbing fuck is looming. But beware oh friends…because desperate times call for desperate measures and while we are savvy they are slimy and, as demonstrated with randy “donkey fucker” saff they will go to any fucking lengths to shut you down. But no matter what they know it’s a fight they cannot win.
….-=\

We the people should be the judge of this and we’re gonna just let it slide…
Not the few who knows no better then we do.
JimmyX

@ # 24:

Will do hiro81,

I’ve backdated your subscription to my first issue in 1901. :-)
DakE_FeatH

[quote comment="253734"]Paying for the movie in one medium doesn’t mean you’re entitled to it in every other medium. That’s like buying a burger at one McDonald’s and thinking you’re entitled to one at every other McDonald’s. I don’t lend things to people; I make a copy and give it to them. And whether the RIAA represents every company in the industry or just the important ones isn’t relevant. The RIAA constitutes enough companies to represent a majority of the industry. The RIAA may not directly represent that artists or songwriters, but the suits and middlemen represent the artists and songwriters. So either way the RIAA serves their interests. I realize p2p helps little known or unknown artists get their name out there, but that doesn’t mean it helps sales for known artists. It’s easy to say “I would pay for it if it were cheaper”, or whatever the fuck, but its not. So just steal it, admit its stealing, and continue on your merry way. I don’t understand why you people need to justify stealing someone’s property by claiming is sharing or they can afford it or its wrong or waaa it’s not fair. Why can’t the concept of stealing just be embraced?! You pseudo-revolutionaries need to get off your high horse stop thinking you’re some kinda new age Thomas Paine.[/quote]

The McDonald’s shit is not the same thing as with movies. You see, somebody makes each burger, somebody works manually for that burger, and once u eat it, it’s gone, you cannot share what you ate already with your friend.
“I don’t lend things to people; I make a copy and give it to them.” Mind you … that right there is “piracy”. You SHARE. Don’t tell me you make your friend pay for the movie because “oh..i paid for it, now u should also pay for it”.
And I dont think 50 Cent or Nelly Furtado go crying around for their songs that have been downloaded online, cuz ppl go to their concerts.

“I don’t understand why you people need to justify stealing someone’s property by claiming is sharing or they can afford it or its wrong or waaa it’s not fair.” – is it something tangible? Do money from someone’s bank account go missin everytime a file is downloaded? No. And tell me, would you be willing to spend half of your 1-month salary on a movie bought from a licensed store? Yes that’s how much they cost in comparison to salaries in not so developed countries such as US and Canada. I dont no where ur from, but dont assume everybody affords whatever u take for granted. would u rather send those ppl back in the stone age? As long as I’m not puttin my name for author of the file and i’m not sellin the shit i download, i dont see the problem. It’s called sharing and you can’t stop it. We will merrily keep doing it :)
DakE_FeatH

[quote comment="253796"] I don’t even know why I’m arguing about this. I’m downloading as I type this. It just vexes me none the responders seem to grasp the concept of property rights, or stealing, and this idiotic idealism?! WTF[/quote]

What, does it make you feel guilty now that you’re downloading? Are we supposed to live in fear now because we’re “Stealing”? Why do you insist on the stealing so much? If the companies embrace the new way of customer demand, I am willing to pay for their shit. Mind you, not $30-$50 on something virtual. Since you cannot touch it, it should be cheap. And they would get a lot more buyers. It’s impossible to win against an already existing system that’s better than the old one.
Red Storm Rising

[quote comment="253796"]All you people who talk about civil wars and revolutions are retarded. The president is a puppet of the party. Realize there are three branches of government; the executive is only one of them. The congress and senate hold more responsibility for what’s going on than the President. The president represents the party, he is their tool. You think the president is chosen to be the representative of the party, is elected to office, and then just gets to do whatever he wants?! All this talk about his supposed crimes is moronic. The majority of the government is complicit, and has to be for “his” decisions to have any effect. And Blacklotus, you talk about how our society is now run by industries and monopolies influencing government, I think you need to read a history book. There hasn’t been a division between economics and government since the nation’s inception. Also, your question about my fan getting sued, I say GOOD! The fan is a customer, I’m in it for the money and the customer stole from me. Sharing isn’t sharing if you don’t have the other person’s permission, its STEALING! Snap out of your communist fantasy and realize America is a country of laws that protects property and business practices. I don’t even know why I’m arguing about this. I’m downloading as I type this. It just vexes me none the responders seem to grasp the concept of property rights, or stealing, and this idiotic idealism?! WTF[/quote]

I predict Malarkey will be the first one put up against the wall. :P
Post On Fire

I believe in “do not judge and you will not be judged”
http://www.postonfire.com
Kettle

Unauthorized P2P isn’t sharing it’s copying. Sharing is where I have something that I give to someone else for them to use. I no longer have that thing when the other person has it. It’s the same as if you bought a book. If you share it with someone, they have it – you don’t. You can’t be reading it while they are.

And the argument that artists shouldn’t complain because they gain the exposure – is weak. Most artists don’t tour. So if an artist makes their living strictly off of album or song sales, they have gained nothing from your copying.

Call a spade a spade – it’s not sharing, it’s illegal copying.
DiskJunkie

RIAA and MPAA are dying. Technology has rendered their business model worthless. The issue for most of us now is how to stay out from under foot as they thrash and roar in their death throes.
RobInMI61

The RIAA now says copying the CDs that you BOUGHT to your PC or iPod is stealing. This was considered “fair use” but the RIAA now claims its theft.

This organization, along with the MPAA are desperately trying to do what they can to survive, but as a parasite, its simply killing its host (the buying public) as it feeds.

Even the artists are coming out against them and their tactics. Support the artists, but boycott anyone that is associated with the RIAA and MPAA.
rzogati

historically artists have always been ripped(off) by management. you can’t live two lives at the same time, and it takes the concentration and conviction of a single life to master any art form, even skullduggery. some contribute, and others steal their contributions. a career of successful thievery is the goal of managerial types with no discernible talent other than gaining from others’ hard (and original) work. middlemen who get between talent and audience, producer and user/consumer (as packagers) for the redirection of wealth is what most people choose as a preferable career. contribute to self first, then trickle on the peons, in hopes they’ll never rebel. it’s all around us, wherever you look. people are most of all, selfish. (we’re #1!)
sporg

@Malarkey: RIAA drone! You’re so transparent its not even funny. Sharing is not stealing, idiot. If I buy a videotape and watch it with friends at a party, or loan it (or even GIVE IT) to a friend, does that mean I’m stealing from the company that provided the content? NO. It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to figure this stuff out: they are greedy, pure and simple. They make examples out of working/middle class folks who can’t afford hefty lawyers fees, because they aren’t willing to compromise and be fair to consumers. the artists make a paltry percentage compared to what these dirty executives make, and people are just getting sick of the bullsh!t.
gleongelpi

DO NOT DONATE! You will only be helping RIAA in the long run. She should go in the courtroom and laugh at them. It is incredible that someone like this person who really has nothing will act as if she had something to lose. She should tell them to go get phhuckk. She should represent herself, and turn the affair into a long lasting issue. If you want to do something, show up at the courthouse and harrass the RIAA people. Let 100 people show up at the trial. Go to the RIAA people and tell them you will never buy any music again. Go to the attorney’s offices and the RIAA offices. You know what to do. Make them feel the heat. But, do not give this person any money. That is throwing good money after bad.
fsxl

Does anyone know where I can buy a pitchfork and a torch?
Deserving

The solution to all JAMIE’S problems…DON’T STEAL!
James.

LOL steal.

So anyway. I’m off to download some new albums.
DakE_FeatH

[quote comment="254265"]The solution to all JAMIE’S problems…DON’T STEAL![/quote]

Did you actually THINK before you came up with this? Take 5 seconds next time to reason what you’re gonna rite
….-=\

i dont read news
news = brainwash= mind control
or manipulation
don’t fall for this deception
news= full of lies, inconsistency.
Whatever

On the one hand, sucks for her and her situation – on the other hand — who in their right fucking mind hires a martime attorney to fight a case of this magnitude?

And while I truly believe that the RIAA settlement offers are tantamount to blackmail — you cannot tell me she did not spend more than $3000 on attorney’s fees anyway to fight this (if she didn’t – that was clue #1 that her assclown attorney was unqualified) — I’m all about fighting a case to prove a point, but the fact of the matter is, the RIAA was going to be awarded damages in a judgment in one of these cases – it was only a matter of time – and while it is too bad for this woman that she was the first “example” on any sort of giant scale — you have to consider the fact that you might lose, and lose big, before embarking on this kind of legal fight.

As far as I can tell, she doesn’t have the assetts to pay the fine anyway. File bankruptcy and get the damn thing over with. I mean, that’s the “real” American way to solve debt. At this point, looking over the case (and I haven’t had access to all documents, just little bits and pieces on West Law and Lexis Nexis), most of her appeal grounds aren’t that strong because her defense was non-existent and getting consideration for inadequate counsel (and this wasn’t – it was awful counsel, but not inadequate) in a civil matter is almost impossible anyway. The jury instructions don’t appear to be enough to warrant a full-out reversal of damages – because obtuse or not, they weren’t exactly wrong, and the whole thing was just like shooting fish in a barrel for the RIAA.

So again, I have to ask — assuming she spent at least as much on legal counsel as it would have cost to settle, and it being clear that she is not trying to make a greater “principle” argument in fighting the case (look at who she hired), why in the hell didn’t she just settle to begin with?

The EFF cannot help her now. The RIAA is awful – but much of this is her own fucking fault for choosing to go to court with counsel not specialized in this field, without doing the research, and most importantly, without even trying to mount a real case.
annonymous

[quote comment="254194"][quote comment="253796"] I don’t even know why I’m arguing about this. I’m downloading as I type this. It just vexes me none the responders seem to grasp the concept of property rights, or stealing, and this idiotic idealism?! WTF[/quote]

What, does it make you feel guilty now that you’re downloading? Are we supposed to live in fear now because we’re “Stealing”? Why do you insist on the stealing so much? If the companies embrace the new way of customer demand, I am willing to pay for their shit. Mind you, not $30-$50 on something virtual. Since you cannot touch it, it should be cheap. And they would get a lot more buyers. It’s impossible to win against an already existing system that’s better than the old one.[/quote]
[quote comment="254192"][quote comment="253734"]Paying for the movie in one medium doesn’t mean you’re entitled to it in every other medium. That’s like buying a burger at one McDonald’s and thinking you’re entitled to one at every other McDonald’s. I don’t lend things to people; I make a copy and give it to them. And whether the RIAA represents every company in the industry or just the important ones isn’t relevant. The RIAA constitutes enough companies to represent a majority of the industry. The RIAA may not directly represent that artists or songwriters, but the suits and middlemen represent the artists and songwriters. So either way the RIAA serves their interests. I realize p2p helps little known or unknown artists get their name out there, but that doesn’t mean it helps sales for known artists. It’s easy to say “I would pay for it if it were cheaper”, or whatever the fuck, but its not. So just steal it, admit its stealing, and continue on your merry way. I don’t understand why you people need to justify stealing someone’s property by claiming is sharing or they can afford it or its wrong or waaa it’s not fair. Why can’t the concept of stealing just be embraced?! You pseudo-revolutionaries need to get off your high horse stop thinking you’re some kinda new age Thomas Paine.[/quote]

The McDonald’s shit is not the same thing as with movies. You see, somebody makes each burger, somebody works manually for that burger, and once u eat it, it’s gone, you cannot share what you ate already with your friend.
“I don’t lend things to people; I make a copy and give it to them.” Mind you … that right there is “piracy”. You SHARE. Don’t tell me you make your friend pay for the movie because “oh..i paid for it, now u should also pay for it”.
And I dont think 50 Cent or Nelly Furtado go crying around for their songs that have been downloaded online, cuz ppl go to their concerts.

“I don’t understand why you people need to justify stealing someone’s property by claiming is sharing or they can afford it or its wrong or waaa it’s not fair.” – is it something tangible? Do money from someone’s bank account go missin everytime a file is downloaded? No. And tell me, would you be willing to spend half of your 1-month salary on a movie bought from a licensed store? Yes that’s how much they cost in comparison to salaries in not so developed countries such as US and Canada. I dont no where ur from, but dont assume everybody affords whatever u take for granted. would u rather send those ppl back in the stone age? As long as I’m not puttin my name for author of the file and i’m not sellin the shit i download, i dont see the problem. It’s called sharing and you can’t stop it. We will merrily keep doing it :)[/quote]
[quote comment="253635"][quote]Life isn’r fair children. [/quote]

Why just dismiss something that is wrong so easily?

Maybe I’ll use the government to steal 200,000$ from you – you’ll protest, so will others – I’ll dismiss that with “life’s not fair”.

[quote]Sharing is “stealing” and if you don’t like it, write a letter to your congressman. [/quote]

Sharing is not stealing – sharing as a definition, no government can change it.

You have no concept of freedom, child.

[quote]You guys hate the RIAA because you don’t want to pay for music?[/quote]

I hate the RIAA because they persecute people for sharing and ruin lives.[/quote]
[quote comment="254617"]i dont read news
news = brainwash= mind control
or manipulation
don’t fall for this deception
news= full of lies, inconsistency.[/quote]
annonymous

[quote comment="254194"][quote comment="253796"] I don’t even know why I’m arguing about this. I’m downloading as I type this. It just vexes me none the responders seem to grasp the concept of property rights, or stealing, and this idiotic idealism?! WTF[/quote]

What, does it make you feel guilty now that you’re downloading? Are we supposed to live in fear now because we’re “Stealing”? Why do you insist on the stealing so much? If the companies embrace the new way of customer demand, I am willing to pay for their shit. Mind you, not $30-$50 on something virtual. Since you cannot touch it, it should be cheap. And they would get a lot more buyers. It’s impossible to win against an already existing system that’s better than the old one.[/quote]
[quote comment="254192"][quote comment="253734"]Paying for the movie in one medium doesn’t mean you’re entitled to it in every other medium. That’s like buying a burger at one McDonald’s and thinking you’re entitled to one at every other McDonald’s. I don’t lend things to people; I make a copy and give it to them. And whether the RIAA represents every company in the industry or just the important ones isn’t relevant. The RIAA constitutes enough companies to represent a majority of the industry. The RIAA may not directly represent that artists or songwriters, but the suits and middlemen represent the artists and songwriters. So either way the RIAA serves their interests. I realize p2p helps little known or unknown artists get their name out there, but that doesn’t mean it helps sales for known artists. It’s easy to say “I would pay for it if it were cheaper”, or whatever the fuck, but its not. So just steal it, admit its stealing, and continue on your merry way. I don’t understand why you people need to justify stealing someone’s property by claiming is sharing or they can afford it or its wrong or waaa it’s not fair. Why can’t the concept of stealing just be embraced?! You pseudo-revolutionaries need to get off your high horse stop thinking you’re some kinda new age Thomas Paine.[/quote]

The McDonald’s shit is not the same thing as with movies. You see, somebody makes each burger, somebody works manually for that burger, and once u eat it, it’s gone, you cannot share what you ate already with your friend.
“I don’t lend things to people; I make a copy and give it to them.” Mind you … that right there is “piracy”. You SHARE. Don’t tell me you make your friend pay for the movie because “oh..i paid for it, now u should also pay for it”.
And I dont think 50 Cent or Nelly Furtado go crying around for their songs that have been downloaded online, cuz ppl go to their concerts.

“I don’t understand why you people need to justify stealing someone’s property by claiming is sharing or they can afford it or its wrong or waaa it’s not fair.” – is it something tangible? Do money from someone’s bank account go missin everytime a file is downloaded? No. And tell me, would you be willing to spend half of your 1-month salary on a movie bought from a licensed store? Yes that’s how much they cost in comparison to salaries in not so developed countries such as US and Canada. I dont no where ur from, but dont assume everybody affords whatever u take for granted. would u rather send those ppl back in the stone age? As long as I’m not puttin my name for author of the file and i’m not sellin the shit i download, i dont see the problem. It’s called sharing and you can’t stop it. We will merrily keep doing it :)[/quote]
[quote comment="253635"][quote]Life isn’r fair children. [/quote]

Why just dismiss something that is wrong so easily?

Maybe I’ll use the government to steal 200,000$ from you – you’ll protest, so will others – I’ll dismiss that with “life’s not fair”.

[quote]Sharing is “stealing” and if you don’t like it, write a letter to your congressman. [/quote]

Sharing is not stealing – sharing as a definition, no government can change it.

You have no concept of freedom, child.

[quote]You guys hate the RIAA because you don’t want to pay for music?[/quote]

I hate the RIAA because they persecute people for sharing and ruin lives.[/quote]
[quote comment="254617"]i dont read news
news = brainwash= mind control
or manipulation
don’t fall for this deception
news= full of lies, inconsistency.[/quote]
In response to Malarkey and you other idiots that call this stealing. If I go and pay $16.00 for a new CD and want to share it with others I’m going to. I payed the price for it and will damn well do what I want with it
P2PbutMe

The petty tyrant/recording industry is going down the sewer and they’re taking as many people with them as they can.
As a bloated girl band once sang, “…if I fall you’re going down with me…”
annonymous

[quote comment="254265"]The solution to all JAMIE’S problems…DON’T STEAL![/quote]
How do you figure what people are doing is stealing? If you pay for a Cd or DVD with your money, that CD or DVD becomes yours. You own it and should be able to do whatever you want with it. What is wrong with you people That think sharing something of yours with others is stealing? Get a life…
weiss

1. the argument that the spirit of p2p is fundamentally sharing is not going to stand in court, be it in america or anywhere else in the world; realize that the nature of lawsuits for riaa/mpaa are still ill-defined in that IP “violations” are still grey in the area! is it a criminal lawsuit or a civil lawsuit? if it is a criminal lawsuit then nothing you can say here in the matter of moral fabric or embedded moral values counts for shit. what counts is what is being institutionalized. AND THAT IS WHY WHO THE FUCK YOU VOTE FOR IS GOING TO MATTER.

2. the KEY problem with IP is that there is no such thing as owning IP despite paying for it. YOU ARE PAYING FOR ACCESS. HISTORICALLY it has ALWAYS been like that. its just that no one ever realized until alternative distribution methods and forms started happening. you paid to go see a movie, of which the cost was computed upon various different factors (equipment, distributors, production, etc.); in other words, you paid for the experience and what it took for the experience to happen. now that the internet is a major way of distributing information, alot of that is both simultaneously turned visible (in the cutting out of middle men) and cut out of distribution. THAT is the KEY reason why IPs must go down in cost. because production can and has become significantly, relatively CHEAPER than in the past. things still haven’t changed you know, we NEVER really ever owned what we purchased. what we owed was right to access. it has ALWAYS been like this and it is what people still don’t get.

3. THAT IS WHY THE CONCEPT OF IP MUST CHANGE RIGHT NOW. because in that case then proprietary business models will continue to flourish in that RESOURCES to control distribution, ownership, definition of IP, etc. are STILL in their hands. in this world where things must hit big in order to hit the gold — only made possible because everything is formed through a “franchise” mentality….IP is a money tree idea in itself!! see: spiderman -> movie -> game -> memorabilia —- this array of goods for consumption, creative content for consumption, is only made possible and can only be orchestrated from a top down level. and for as far as THIS SOCIETY embraces THAT WAY OF CONSUMPTION then this fight via piracy will remain fundamentally enslaved to the wrong, self-defeating values. its not about sharing really. its about escaping the clutches of this “rinse-and-repeat”ness of our media consumption.

4. what we really need to do is DISMANTLE TOP DOWN POWER and return artistic OWNERSHIP back to the TRUE CONTENT CREATOR. that means the guy who writes the music, the guy who writes the script, the guy who writes the book — the guy who truly created. that is what this whole fucking thing should be about. getting rid of the middlemen, the agencies, the managers………..SHOWING THAT THE RIAA AND MPAA HAVE NO. RIGHT. TO. SUE.

because *they* don’t owe any of the genius that we consume. what they do is contort it into a franchise which they can distribute, of which they can make coin of endlessly. their representation means nothing. there is no glory in showing up as the master of slaves… and thats what they are.
oneplusone

[quote comment="253591"]It’s ridiculous to contrast RIAA loses versus gains or talk about whether she “deserved” this fine. It’s like you people have no concept of property rights. Life isn’r fair children. Sharing is “stealing” and if you don’t like it, write a letter to your congressman. You can’t justify taking someone’s property just because they’re rich. I think some of you people have watched Robin Hood too many times.[/quote]

You simply cannot justify criminalizing and punishing a single person THAT MUCH for facsimiles of 24 songs. You are so out of touch as to be rendered a danger to everyone else. Lock YOU up and throw away the key.
oneplusone

Quoted: 12 Jan 02, 2008 at 00:20 by James.Quote James.

No point writing to congressmen, they’re all bought and sold already.

*************************************

It’s the new white slave trade… POLITICS!!!
….-=\

If you want to fight them
RI** and MP**
Just ignore them
Roll over, go to sleep
Its not like they can bleed ya to death
Its just to scare ya and use as an example to others.
They don’t care me. I do whatever the hell I like, its my rights.
Elizabeth J.

Please donate to Jammie:

http://freejammie.com
Chris

On top of all this, if its a bit torrent she only shared a bit of a song, not even an entire song, so therefore she is being sued for seconds of 24 different songs. So from a technical standpoint, you shouldn’t be able to sue a person for three seconds of a song. If your going to sue someone you need to have the every single person who shared a single song on trial and sue them all at once for a single song. I understand they are trying to make a statement and want to scare people that read headlines, but there is no way they should be able to gain 200,000+ dollars from her, video rental stores pay 80.00 max for the rights to share movies with other people, a single song rights should be no more than 20.00 a song. This amount is out of control.
Pingback: Understanding Anti-Piracy Enforcement | TorrentFreak
Pingback: Understanding Anti-Piracy Enforcement - TorrentFreak at fluxbox.co.uk
Pingback: Zwartbaard » Blog Archive » Understanding Anti-Piracy Enforcement
Pingback: RIAA Pays $107,951 to Alleged Filesharer | TorrentFreak
Pingback: La RIAA condannata a pagare 107.951 $ « JaKoPo - Un po’ di questo, un po’ di quello …
Pingback: RIAA Pays $107,951 to Alleged Filesharer - Zwartbaard
Pingback: RIAA Pays $107,951 to Alleged Filesharer « All Things News

TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Thomas Seeks New Lawyer to Appeal the RIAA

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

NewsBits

Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

MostDiscussed

Pirate Bay Takes Over Distribution of Censored 3D Printable Gun

McAfee Patents Technology to Detect and Block Pirated Content

Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

Copyright Trolls Threaten to Call Neighbors of Accused Porn Pirates

Game Pirates Whine About Piracy in Game Dev Simulator

CopyQuote

PopularArticles

VPN Services That Take Your Anonymity Seriously, 2013 Edition

Top 10 Most Popular Torrent Sites of 2013

Which VPN Service Providers Really Take Anonymity Seriously?

What’s The Best VPN / Proxy for BitTorrent?

BTGuard Review: How Does it Work?

Optimize Your BitTorrent Download Speed