Is a digital copy of Green Day’s classic pop-punk song "Basket Case" worth $80,000 U.S.?
What about an MP3 of Sarah McLachlan’s soulful ditty "Building a Mystery"?
That’s what Jammie Thomas-Rasset may very well end up paying for each of the 24 songs she shared on the online file-sharing service Kazaa, as the result of a landmark ruling yesterday.
The case is at the centre of the recording industry’s litigious efforts to stop people from downloading copyrighted music for free over the Internet.
This Oct. 4, 2007 file photo shows Jammie Thomas-Rasset of Brainerd, Minn., outside federal court in Duluth, Minn. A federal jury ruled Thursday, June 18, 2009 that Thomas-Rasset willfully violated the copyrights on 24 songs, and awarded recording companies $1.92 million, or $80,000 per song.
A federal jury in Minnesota found the 32-year-old single mother of four guilty of copyright infringement and ordered her to pay $1.92-million (U.S.) – or $80,000 a song – in statutory damages to the record companies that brought the lawsuit against her.
“There’s no way they’re ever going to get that,” Ms. Thomas-Rasset said after the verdict. “I’m a mom, limited means, so I’m not going to worry about it now.”
This is the second time Ms. Thomas-Rasset has had a jury verdict go against her in this case, the first instance of a file-sharing lawsuit going to trial in the United States. A different federal jury also found her guilty in 2007 and rendered a $222,000 judgment.
There's no way they're ever going to get that. I'm a mom, limited means, so I'm not going to worry about it now. — Jammie Thomas-Rasset, a 32-year-old mother of four referring to the $1.92-million fine
Although the Recording Industry Association of America – the trade organization that represents the largest music labels in the United States – said it has stopped launching new lawsuits against individual file sharers, the organization said it would be willing to settle the suits it has already filed and continues to pursue out of court, including Ms. Thomas-Rasset’s case.
“When the facts are presented to juries on these issues, they take this issue seriously and appreciate the real harm that’s done to the music community,” the RIAA said in a e-mail.
“Remember, it was a jury of regular folks who rendered this decision. We do not seek any specific damage awards. For the few existing cases, this verdict is a reminder of the clarity of the law.”
U.S. District Judge Michael Davis heard the first lawsuit the RIAA brought against Ms. Thomas-Rasset in 2007. He ordered a new trial after concluding he had given poor instructions to the jurors by saying that the record companies were not required to show that anyone actually downloaded the songs Ms. Thomas-Rasset had on her computer.
He later decided that U.S. law requires that it be proven downloading took place.
Although Ms. Thomas-Rasset has not yet decided whether she will appeal the verdict, some legal analysts say she may be able to challenge the jury’s decision on constitutional grounds.
Fred von Lohmann, senior staff lawyer for the advocacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that financial penalties in civil cases can not be “grossly excessive” or be used as deterrents.
“If the recording industry lawyer said that you need to send a message in order to get all of those other file sharers to stop or to compensate us for all the harm that they’ve done to our business, then they might have crossed the line,” he said.
With a report from Associated Press
