Second Person Fined For Sharing, Press Still Confused
from the hmmm... dept
A week ago, we wrote about how a Connecticut woman who was among those charged by the RIAA was fined by a judge for failing to appear in court. We pointed out that the press got the story wrong. No one has been sued for downloading - but rather for sharing music. It appears that the press is still confused. In an almost identical situation, the same judge has fined a Connecticut man $4,000 - again for failing to respond to the lawsuit. Once again, the article says it was for downloading songs. Actually, they claim it's because he downloaded a grand total of five songs. Considering the RIAA says they were only going after those with hundreds (if not thousands) of songs, this doesn't sound right. Of course, since the AP reporter couldn't even be bothered to understand what the case was about, I guess it's too much to expect to get any of the relevant details.
3 Comments | Leave a Comment..
- Schrödinger's Download: Whether Or Not An iTunes Music Sale Is A 'Sale' Depends On Who's Suing
- We Don't Have A 'Wild West' Internet Now, But We Will If SOPA Or Similar Is Passed
- One Nation, Under Guard
- Supreme Court Denies Appeal For The Pirate Bay Founders
- White House Says It Can't Comment On Possible Chris Dodd Investigation





Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Kiwi
Download anonymously
http://download.com.com/3000-2166-10288316.html?tag=lst-0-1
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Kiwi
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment