by Mike Masnick
Mon, Oct 27th 2008 5:14pm
Ignoring numerous other court rulings concerning whether or not "making available" is copyright infringement, a judge has rejected a woman's request for a jury trial in her file sharing lawsuit, and ordered her to pay the $7,400 fine already set. This was the case we had just discussed last week, where the woman claimed that the RIAA only had evidence that she had shared six songs, even though she admitted to making 37 songs available. There was already an agreement in place that the fine would be $200/song, so the real question was whether it should be $7,400 or $1,200. The woman argued that, in light of the Jammie Thomas mistrial and other rulings, the RIAA needed to show actual infringement, rather than just that the files were made available. Unfortunately, this judge rejected that argument and ordered her to pay the full $7,400.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Homeland Security Admits It Seized A Hip Hop Blog For Five Years Despite No Evidence Of Infringement; RIAA Celebrates
- Court Says RIAA Can Just Tell Cloudflare Any Site Is A Grooveshark Clone... And Cloudflare Has 48 Hours To Dump Them
- So How Much Of The $90 Million Pandora Is Paying RIAA Labels To Settle Lawsuit Will Go To Artists?
- HuffPo Columnist: I Infringe, So All Broadband Users Must Pay A New Piracy Tax
- More Details On Copyright Register Maria Pallante's Call For Comprehensive, 'Forward-Thinking, But Flexible' Copyright Reform