Judge Bars RIAA President Sherman from Testifying, RIAA wins

Advertisement (Why?)

The first RIAA lawsuit to go to jury trial has resulted in Judge Michael J. Davis barring Recording Industry Association of America President Cary Sherman from testifying. “I don’t want to turn this case into a soap box for the recording industry,” said Thomas’ counsel Brian Toder. Even after Judge Davis' decision, RIAA counsel Richard Gabriel continued to press on, arguing that Sherman is needed to help the jury see the “massive problem of file sharing,” and that the RIAA is not out to make money but “to prove a point.” Judge Davis remained stalwart, refusing to reconsider.

Capitol Records vs. Jammie Thomas is significant because it is the first case among the RIAA’s litany of more than 18,000 lawsuits to make it to jury trial. With most of the suits, the RIAA tends to push for a settlement to avoid costly litigation. Defendants, facing overwhelming legal fees and the costs of going to court, usually settle for amounts that range from around $3,000 to $11,000.

Update: Jammie Thomas was found guilty of sharing copyrighted music online and levied $220,000 in damages against her: $9,250 for each of the 24 songs she was found guilty of pirating.

News source: DailyTech

(7 replies) #1 Shadrack on 04 Oct 2007 - 22:22

Whether music piracy is "a problem" or not is beside the point and the Judge should bar the president of the RIAA from testifying. Music piracy is against the law regardless of how wide-spread it may be or not be. If the RIAA has solid evidence against Mr. Thomas then they should win their case against him. If the jury has been presented with solid evidence that Mr. Thomas broke the law and still does not vote against him then the Judge will step in and over-turn the jury's decision (or something along those lines).

The voting choices are kinda poor. Although I do not agree with the aggressive practices of the RIAA, I do think that the judge was doing the right thing by baring irrelevant testimony. Just because the judge did the right thing, doesn't mean he is bias against the RIAA...just means he has a head on his shoulders.

Imagine if during a murder trial the prosecutor put a witness on the stand that just talked about how big of a problem murder is in our society. It wouldn't be relevant, and the jury shouldn't hear about it to make their decision regarding a single case.

#1.1 metallithrax on 04 Oct 2007 - 22:27

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=3690823

She's been fined $220,000

#1.2 Shadrack on 04 Oct 2007 - 22:43

Quote - (metallithrax said @ #1.1)

holy cow! Now that is unfair.

#1.3 SacrificialSoldier on 04 Oct 2007 - 23:21

Quote - (Shadrack said @ #1.2)

Well, want to take back what you said earlier? Music Piracy may be illegal but fining some one $220,000 should be illegal!

#1.4 Foub on 05 Oct 2007 - 00:31

Quote - (SacrificialSoldier said @ #1.3)

Its like sending pot smokers to prison for 20 years....

#1.5 seamer on 05 Oct 2007 - 04:16

Quote - (Foub said @ #1.4)

True that, life sentences sounds acceptible.

#1.6 ThaCrip on 05 Oct 2007 - 05:27

exactly! ... cause i think it's FAR FAR worse for those pri*ks (RIAA) to fine you 220K to the average joe than it is to steal alot of mp3's... cause it hurts the average joe FAR more than it hurts the music industry.

bottom line there never going to stop piracy... it's just not realistic.

#1.7 Zoue on 05 Oct 2007 - 17:41

Quote - (ThaCrip said @ #1.6)

bottom line there never going to stop piracy... it's just not realistic.

Yeah! We'll never stop murderers either, so why bother?

(1 reply) #2 Croquant on 04 Oct 2007 - 22:42

"The jury ordered Jammie Thomas, 30, to pay the six record companies that sued her $9,250 for each of 24 songs they focused on in the case. They had alleged she shared 1,702 songs in all."

Because, of course MP3s of songs are actually worth many times more than the CD's they were ripped from...

I'll be suing the RIAAA now for emotional pain and suffering due to having been exposed to Britney's aborted carer comeback. That should be worth a couple million at least, right?

Gimme Gimme.. more. Gimmee.. More.

#2.1 C_Guy on 05 Oct 2007 - 14:24

The "worth" of pirated songs really is more than the $1 you pay online or a fraction of the $20 you spent on it's album to get it. Why? Because when you share the file others are acquiring it without paying for it. So, if 100 people acquire it without paying for it, that's a $100 that the record company should have received from those 100 people in exchange for the song but didn't. That's why piracy is theft.

(3 replies) #3 Popcorned on 04 Oct 2007 - 23:12

Quote -

In the first such lawsuit to go to trial, the record companies accused Thomas of downloading the songs without permission and offering them online through a Kazaa file-sharing account. Thomas denied wrongdoing and testified that she didn't have a Kazaa account.

Kazaa is asking to be caught.

#3.1 whocares78 on 05 Oct 2007 - 08:02

kazaa is doing nothign ilegal, refer to the Sony case with VCR's, sony was cleared of any wrongdoing for VCR's ebing able to copy, i find it funny that sony has changed it's tune now that it looses money through piracy, all in all they can ghet rid of the file sharing apps, however all they are doing is stopping an extremely efficient way of transfering files whcih can and does get used for entirely legal purposes, people copied stuff when all they had was tape decks. piracy will never end

#3.2 +Odom on 05 Oct 2007 - 10:00

On that account, all mp3 players are illegal, since they allow the reproduction of illegaly obtained music files.

#3.3 balupton on 05 Oct 2007 - 17:28

Kazaa is illegal in Australia along with many other p2p technologies.

#4 +chaosblade on 04 Oct 2007 - 23:51

4000 USD for a single song? That's just absurd. United States Of Absurdity, indeed.

(1 reply) #5 Relativity_17 on 05 Oct 2007 - 00:37

The courts of the United States of America have torn down the ideology of justice and erected in its place a shrine to capitalism. Justice is dead.

#5.1 cork1958 on 05 Oct 2007 - 02:03

Yes, the courts, congress, the house of reps, state legislatures, chief of police here in town, everybody!! They have all torn down the ideology of justice and erected in its place a shrine to capitalism.

It's all about that almight dollar!!

#6 dl0711 on 05 Oct 2007 - 01:42

“massive problem of file sharing,” and that the RIAA is not out to make money but “to prove a point.”

what point may that be?? as it seems like the point trying to be made over the years has not been made.. so RIAA stop with the "not out to make money" because that is an outright lie.. we all know the truth and you can also see the truth be told by the canadian music artists right here - http://www.musiccreators.ca/wp/

#7 bibutteryboy on 05 Oct 2007 - 01:53

lobbyists for major labels are looking out for their shareholders, and seldom speak for Canadian artists.

newsflash. without shareholders you wouldn't be making millions of dollars and living in a 20 room mansion.
If artists REALLY wanted to buck the system then they would forgoe recording thier music with a label. Tell me, why don't they do that?

(1 reply) #8 jazzyfan on 05 Oct 2007 - 02:32

What's scary is that LimeWire and P2P is a trap. People think that what they're doing is totally legal and then they get sued.

#8.1 whocares78 on 05 Oct 2007 - 08:04

everyone knows you don't get anythign for free, i don't knwo anyone that trully believes that downloading music is not wrong, they all knwo it's illegal.

#9 war on 05 Oct 2007 - 05:31

Ouch!!! ahahahaha

#10 nrichey on 05 Oct 2007 - 06:08

This lawsuit will not help the RIAA any more. People will follow the words of Trent Reznor in Autralia, "Steal it. Steal away. Steal and steal and steal some more and give it to all your friends and keep on stealin'. Because one way or another these ************* will get it through their head that they're ripping people off and that that's not right." Of course, he intended it for his albums in his own country; but people from other countries will take that to heart.

Many people will be outraged and find ways to NOT support the music industry. Whether it's by getting music under the table, buying used CD's from eBay, or resorting only to independent labels. The RIAA won't really benefit from this in the long run. But of course, there are still teenages who will also resort to iTunes.

#11 TC17 on 05 Oct 2007 - 07:01

The TRUE theives are the RIAA/MPAA. They are the ones stealing the money, they are the ones taking the actual money.

It also just proves the injustice we have in America. We aren't the great country we get made out to be.

#12 Vandalsquad on 05 Oct 2007 - 08:02

Its great to live in a country were they dont sue individuals.

#13 ANova on 05 Oct 2007 - 09:42

A Perfect Circle's Gimme Gimme Gimme is the RIAA's official theme song.

#14 C_Guy on 05 Oct 2007 - 14:32

It's a relief to see that the jury was able to recognize this illegal activity on its own without the RIAA's testimony. Shadrack is absolutely right - music piracy is illegal whether the RIAA is parading around or not. The take-home message is perfect: Criminals will be caught and the RIAA's testimony is irrelevant.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Neowin.net