June 19, 2009
At least in Minnesota it does. Talk about juries gone wild.
32 y/o woman with 4 children, who works for an Indian tribe, illegally downloaded 24 99¢ songs.
[Article doesn't specify if she went on to distribute them or make a profit off them or if it was just personal use.]
Shock one – They take it to a jury trial.
Shock two – The jury finds her guilty and sets a penalty of $220,000.
Sanity: The judge throws out the judgment because an error in jury instructions. Perhaps about the appropriateness of the fine meeting the crime?
Shock three – Judge orders a retrial.
Insanity: Did consider how much $23.76 was eventually going to cost the taxpayers with a second trial? Or was he planning to add it on to a penalty the woman cannot in a million years pay?
Shock four – Jury finds her guilty and increases the penalty to $80,000 per 99¢ song = $1,900,000.
Shock five – Spokeswoman for the Recording Industry Association of America, states, in all seriousness:
We appreciate the jury’s service and that they take this as seriously as we do.
Insanity: Spokeswoman thinks theft of $23.76 warrants two trials and a penalty of $1,900,000.
Explanation: Notoriety of first such copyright infringement trial to make it to court.
After the appeals are exhausted, how much is $23.76 going to cost the individual taxpayer? More than the original $23.76?
And after all is said and done, how much will the process have cost the Recording Industry? More than $1,900,000?
Source: CNN -ELLIANE FRIEND
No comments:
Post a Comment