Woman illegally downloads 24 songs, fined to tune of $1.9 million »

Posted By engineer 5 months, 1 week ago in News

(CNN) -- A federal jury Thursday found a 32-year-old Minnesota woman guilty of illegally downloading music from the Internet and fined her $80,000 each -- a total of $1.9 million -- for 24 songs

Federal jury finds Jammie Thomas-Rasset guilty of illegally downloading 24 songs
Minnesota wife, mom slapped with fine of $80,000 per song, for total of $1.9 million
Attorney says client shocked at fine, noting the songs costs 99 cents each
Spokeswoman for the Recording Industry Association of America lauds jury's finding.

Read Full Story at cnn.com »

592 Views Share Story 20 Comments Report

Submitted By:
engineer

Hi

My background is Biomedical engineering with an MBA As you know from all my comments where I almost stand politically. I have loads of ...

Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:

RSS Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 20 (view all)
- Display
  • 100%
    engineer5 months, 1 week ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    The fines are fully obscene!!!

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
    Reply

    2 Replies

    loading loading ...
  • 100%
    publiconet165 months, 1 week ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    This is exactly what the Music Industry wanted a Scape goat for their crap music they blame everything on music sharing and or on line single music d/l.Their nuts..first of all they will never ever see the money,if you want to curb D/L sell decent music at fair prices.I think it would be Great idea if more People stop Buying their crap music and the Record company CEO,s stop getting paid Millions for nothing.

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
    Reply
    loading loading ...
    • 100%
      reallypsst5 months, 1 week ago

      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

      I hope it wasn't limewire, whats next youtube !

      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
      Reply

      1 Reply

      loading loading ...
    • 100%
      MisterX5 months, 1 week ago

      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

      This is unconscionable by any stretch. Our justice system will allow these fines for music, but they want to put caps on medical malpractice suites.

      Music today is so crappy, they should pay me to listen to it.

      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
      Reply

      2 Replies

      loading loading ...
    • 100%
      cleare5 months, 1 week ago

      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

      absoeffinglutely outrageous!!!

      the punishment far outweighs the crime. what was the jury thinking? why didn't the judge override? was he up for re-election?

      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
      Reply
      loading loading ...
      • 100%
        BronxBomber5 months, 1 week ago

        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

        Oh man! I can't add to this. The comments are just too good. But this is a clear case of overkill. I mean c'mon...the woman in question doesn't happen to be related to the swindler Madoff.

        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
        Reply
        loading loading ...
        • 100%
          BronxBomber5 months, 1 week ago

          This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

          WTF was that jury thinking and what does it take to be a juror in that state?

          (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
          Reply
          loading loading ...
          • 100%
            Fangarius5 months, 1 week ago

            This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

            Bad enough the music industries are wanting this 'performance tax' with radio, they'll do anything for a profit. Even establish outrageous fines for downloads. Sort of reminds me when they once 'caught' an illegal downloader, and they were going to make an example of the person.

            Turned out it was young girl who thought she was legally downloading tunes through a respectable service. Talk about blacking the fed's and music industry's eyes on that one!

            (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
            Reply

            1 Reply

            loading loading ...
          • 100%
            Charlson5 months, 1 week ago

            This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

            This type of judgement makes me want to stick it to the Recording Industry. One thing is sure, the $1.9 million won't help pay for all the bad publicity they'll get. This will not stop the billion dollar counterfeiting that's costing them much more than illegal downloading.

            (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
            Reply
            loading loading ...
            • 100%
              jmopinion5 months, 1 week ago

              This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

              Wonder who paid that jury off. Go after China and some of these other countries where you can get anything you want.

              (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
              Reply
              loading loading ...
              • 100%
                globalwarmer5 months, 1 week ago

                This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

                You'd think they'd have to prove she was copying the music to CD's and selling them. They obviously want to make an example of someone, anyone who they can convict in order to scare people not to download music. How the hell is she supposed to pay that fine, get a second job? How can you be convicted for downloading music? Shouldn't they go after the sites that make them available for download? It doesn't make any effing sense!

                (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
                Reply

                1 Reply

                loading loading ...
              View All 20 Comments

              Add a Comment

              Sign In With Your Propeller Account

              Forgot your password?

              Please keep your comments relevant to this story.

              To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.

              More News