$80,000 for a Richard Marx song?!? Sheesh, I don;t think he’s made that much in his whole career!!

People only respond to things that effect them directly. You have to sue everyone for 2 mil for this to work…you brain surgeons.

Astounding! How can Green Day, who claims to be a socially progressive band allow their representatives to bilk this lady for $80,000. If they aren’t saying anything against it, they’re for it. What hypocrites!

Hey Rolling Stone, how about some of that in-depth reporting you are known for and go ask these groups how they feel about getting money from this lady? I’d love to hear their answers!

JAIL THE CROOK !

Apart from hitting the headlines, I’m not sure how practical this can be. Effectively wouldn’t this bankrupt the person in question – potentially seizing assets etc? $100 a track would have been a fine of $2400 which this lady could have probably paid, and it would have hurt. That would make more file-sharers worried that it could happen to them.

The problem with a crime like this is that when you sign up for one of these services and steal music, you by default make it possible for many others to steal the same song. Let’s just say for argument’s sake that each stolen song is worth only $ 0.99. This lady has stolen $1,684.98 of music. Still a misemeanor, but enough to get you some jail time. But say she shared each song just 10 times. You now have $16,849.80 worth theft that you are party to. Guess what? Felony Grand Theft. Probably 5-10 in the clink, fed time, because it’s interstate!

I personally think that this lady should be thankfull that criminal charges were not filed. Every one of these songs has a definate value attached and with the sharing part of it, you have felony dollars. Oh, and I thought of another thing. Since this is basically interstate crime that shows collusion between multiple parties in order to commit the crime, I wondering if federal RICO stautes would apply? You start throwing these assholes in jail forever, I think illegal downloading may stop.

The verdict is obviously correct, but the judgment is probably excessive at $80,000 per song. Instead of being defiant, Thomas-Rasset should try to reach an agreement for reasonable restitution. Theft has become rampant, and many people have no shame. They usually claim the victim is rich and can afford the loss. I’ve even heard a store employee say that about the company he works for, and I have seen people eating and drinking stolen items while shopping there. Copyright laws are necessary to keep the marketplace of ideas open. Even Green Day can’t work for nothing. Quit defending a thief!

pure and utter ridiculousness…the riaa needs to get over themselves.

Yeah let’s just lock up all of the people that illegally download. That’ll work. psssh.

Music should be free. If you want to support the artist, buy an overpriced concert ticket. Or include an album in the price of the concert ticket. This would work for everyone. Besides, why should music artists be multi multi millionaires?

To stop file sharing, you’d have to shut down the file sharing websites. Go after them. Don’t go after music fans who have handed over shitloads of money to the music industry over the years. The rich get richer while the poor get poorer.

what horseshit, you know how many people have upwards of 10,000 songs and yet they target and make an example out of a poor lady with probably the smallest music collection ive ever heard of since napster. sheesh they’re retarded

you asshats…lol Great News!! ohhh big success!! what r u fucking high? you guys act like this is some new-fangled crazy technology. like, wow, more than ten people can share each track, holy shit she has 1000 songs–thats like the rolling stones discography by itself. its so sad that they always target the most innocent and clueless people with their bullshit. i fall into this category myself, but I think it would be 100 times more appropriate if they take care of someone whose even worth busting in the first place. itd be like if a cop said, “Hmmmm, that guy’s driving about 15 under the speed limit….and that guys going 30 over has 3 people fucking shit up with some uzi’s and wreaking havoc all over the place. Yeeeaaahhh, i think i’ll take the old guy.”

The Punishment should force, FORCE the defendant to BUY the artists’ albums for the rest of their careers.

This trial and its outcome were a pointless exercise. The verdict is the same as walking up to a greasy homeless man wearing his boxers outside of his jeans and saying “Give me 3 million dollars right now!!!”

I HAVE 1023 SONGS JUST IN MY “ROCK” PLAYLIST IN iTUNES, AND THAT’S JUST A PART OF MY MUSIC, AND GODDAM IT, I ONLY OWN “DEPECHE MODE” PHYSICAL ALBUMS (AND ONE OF MAROON 5′S [THE SECOND. IT'S COOL.]) I LIKE THE IDEA OF SUPPORTING ARTISTS, BUT I CAN’T SPEND AS MUCH MONEY AS I WOULD ON MUSIC ONLY. THIS IS BULLHSIT! I’M ON THE MOM’S SIDE.

“Astounding! How can Green Day, who claims to be a socially progressive band allow their representatives to bilk this lady for $80,000. If they aren’t saying anything against it, they’re for it. What hypocrites!”

Hey Fred, I don’t think Green Day is even aware of this lawsuit. All that money will wind up going to the people that filed this lawsuit— the record labels. And would you mind explaining to me how stealing is “socially progressive”? You must be a caveman to think that way. In case you haven’t known, writing, producing and recording an album then going on tour for months on end is not a cheap or easy process. Yeah, they’re filthy rich, but they work damn hard for it. I think $1,920,000 is an exceedingly obscene amount of money for someone to pay when the lady only downloaded $24 worth of songs, and I don’t know how the label or the court justifies that amount, but at the same time, there’s a reason why copyright laws exist. We have to respect them or else. If someone has to spend money to make a song, then they should get compensated for it. If you don’t like the song, then don’t buy it. Don’t come up with the crap excuse “but the music sucks so bad it’s not fair that I should dole out my money for it”. There are plenty of websites where you can stream music for free, but you just can’t download them. If like a song and you want to keep it, then go to iTunes or Amazon or Rhapsody and buy the freaking song. If you really like an artist, then support them where it counts.

I hate the idea of illegal downloading; it’s just not right. However, this is absolutely crazy. People get away with downloading thousands of songs without paying a dime, yet this woman has to pay nearly 2 million dollars for 24 songs. This reminds me of that South Park episode lol and that’s not a good thing on the RIAA’s part

SUE MY ASS NOW, MOTHERF***ERS!

And another thing… If the RIAA is fining this woman for songs she downloaded from other artists, the RIAA is taking waayyy more from the artist then this woman did. Because the Lord knows that that 1.92 million dollars is going to go in the RIAA’s pockets as opposed to Green Day or Janet Jackson’s pockets

the music industry is just trying to make up for the years of their head in the sand …if they were as smart as they think they were , they would be making zillions from consumers , but they missed the boat on the digital networking age…fought it every step o the way….dinosaurs still roam the earth !

Oh, she SHARED the songs? I missed that part, I’m sorry, maybe that explains the $1.92 million. Still, how come they went after her for 24 songs if she had 1,702 of them in total? So I guess the other 1,678 songs didn’t count or something?

Support artist by going to concerts and purchasing songs directly from the artists via website, myspace or at said shows. buying albums only puts money in the pockets record comps who refuse to change with technology and need ended GM style. They got greedy in the 90’s and its completely bitten them in the ass the last ten years as anyone who paid 20 bucks for a cd for through the 90’s is NEVER going to feel bad about taking money out of the record comps pockets. Your just dragging out the inevitable Mr. record industry as with myspace, facebook, etc. your distribution monopoly has been rendered useless and digital file sharing will see you to your coffin. Thanks for the memories…now fuck off and die.

Suing a mother of four must make you feel better though.

well someone is going to hell…and Satan does not wear a condom.

I’m an indie record store guy for the most part, but i download my fair share as well. This is serious bullshit. I care about the artists and the record stores but there is no reason to target people like this to make an example.

Um…RollingStone? I hate to break it to you, but here’s what that “strong message” being sent out means to the American public: dick. This will not mitigate illegal downloading even a little, if for no other reason than folks never think THEY’LL be the ones who get caught. All the documented deaths from drug use and drunk driving haven’t dissuaded people from abusing drugs and alcohol. File sharing doesn’t even bring the risk of death!

hard to believe that anyone would waste so much time on this. the record companies should be ashamed of themselves. especially since mp3 files are of such poor quality.

There’s no crime if she didn’t profit off of it. Knowledge and art cannot be controlled. If you want something to be private, don’t release it to the public.

Green Day should foot the bill…..

Till the “Loudness War” ends people shouldn’t be expected to pay for new CD’s till they know they don’t sound like Sh*t!!! I blame you Rick Rubin for Ruining DEATH MAGNETIC!!!! CD’s sound quality should not be overblown!!!! Something that is happening way to much today! DOWN WITH RECORD COMPANIES RUINING MUSIC!!!

No matter how you justify it ! ! !

fantastic job RIAA – are you guys proud? Have you proved your ‘point’? Go suck a bag of D’s.

I am the founder of a small record company in the US and it is of course preposterous fining the woman with such large amount. It just shows how out of control the US legal system is sometimes. I believe there are more effective methods to encourage people to download legally. One effective way would be to follow the example of the UK where someone who downloads illegal content gets a notice form the internet provider and then gets their service terminated if the notice is not heeded. Also I imagine that advertising will have a greater role in the future for the music industry to find other streams of income. The current system of legal downloads have helped a lot small companies like ourselves who would not have had a chance to compete with the big labels, but it has definitely also lessened the income tremendously for the large companies. And this is partly because of the change of technology, but also the big companies in large have not been flexible enough to adapt and change with the times. Vidura Barrios, Founder Inner Splendor Media

So, is it also stealing to check these same 24 songs from the library and copy them for personal use at home?

Is it also stealing to record these same 24 songs from satellite radio broadcasts and then make mixtapes of those songs and give them away to your friends?

When did it become against the law to share music with your friends? How are people supposed to develop meaningful memories of music if they are prevented from sharing it with one another.

If people want to borrow the music I purchased, that is fine with me. I established my ownership of that music when I purchased it.

The record labels have absolutely no one to blame for the current state of the industry but themselves. We’ve had Eminem, Dave Matthews and the Black Eyed Peas sell gobs of CDs in the last few weeks, but when it comes to newer artists, they’re rolling snake eyes. They’ve done nothing this decade to develop tomorrow’s stars, and now it’s coming back to bite them in the —. Blaming this woman and other downloaders for the way things are now is shameless.

You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

If you were to say, “Music is overpriced and shitty these days. I’m not paying for this lousy product!” You’d be in the right. But if you were to steal said music, while at the same time bitch that its over priced and lousy YOU’RE JUST AN ASSHOLE WHO STOLE FROM THE BAND.

Let me give you another example. If you think CDs are overpriced and lousy, and you therefore like to go see bands live: you’re in the right. Maybe the band that made the CD you and other didn’t buy will try to make something better next time. HOWEVER, if you buy on concert ticket and claim “well I’ve done enough to support greenday this year. they are rich anyway, so i’ll just steal their album.” YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE WHO STOLE FROM THE BAND

Wow…the RIAA needs to get over themselves.

ISN’T ALL OF THOSE SONGS PLAYED IN THE BACKGROUND OF VIDEOS ON “YOUTUBE” ,ETC, ILLEGAL SHARING?
GO TO “YOUTUBE” AND SEARCH FOR “SONG WITH LYRICS” JUMPIN’ JESUS ON A POGO STICK!!! TALK ABOUT SHARING.

TULSA, OK

this is bullshit:

“jericho4119 | 6/19/2009, 1:56 pm EST

So, is it also stealing to check these same 24 songs from the library and copy them for personal use at home?

Is it also stealing to record these same 24 songs from satellite radio broadcasts and then make mixtapes of those songs and give them away to your friends?

When did it become against the law to share music with your friends? How are people supposed to develop meaningful memories of music if they are prevented from sharing it with one another.

If people want to borrow the music I purchased, that is fine with me. I established my ownership of that music when I purchased it.”

How are people supposed to develop meaningful memories of music if they are prevented from sharing it with one another?

When I used to tape songs off the radio, there was a marked decline in the quality of sound of the taped songs I had compared to the sound of the tape or CD I could buy at Target. There was still a reason to go buy the CD if I liked the song and it was a complete bitch to try and start recording at the beginning of the song and stop before the DJ started talking again. It was more convenient to buy the Cd in my oppion, but, that is not the point.

The point is that what has changed from me taping songs off the radio and borrowing CDs from kids I knew at school is:

1. People I knew preNapster were able to borrow ten or twelve CDs from their immediate circle of family and friends and make tapes. Being able to share my Cds with my friends and family by making taped copies IS VERY DIFFERENT from being able to make pretty much perfect sound copies of virtually every album ever made with everybody else in the world who “shares” music.

“When did it become against the law to share music with your friends?”

Your definition of “share” is bullshit. For example, if I were to share my bottle of vodka with you, when you drank some, I didn’t get to drink it too. Or, if I were to share my television with you – we could both watch it at the same time, but you could not watch it at your house while I watch it at mine.

HOWEVER when you share your music with everyone else in the world who in on a given P2P network – you experience no loss of that music. This is the fucking point man.

the music biz is sooooooooooo screwed, its not even funny anymore

“When did it become against the law to share music with your friends?”

Your definition of “share” is bullshit. For example, if I were to share my bottle of vodka with you, when you drank some, I didn’t get to drink it too. Or, if I were to share my television with you – we could both watch it at the same time, but you could not watch it at your house while I watch it at mine.

HOWEVER when you share your music with everyone else in the world who in on a given P2P network – you experience no loss of that music. This is the fucking point man.

“… including tracks by Green Day, Janet Jackson, Godsmack and Richard Marx…”

Is there even one other person on earth who’s a fan of that collection of bands?

“For the RIAA, the ruling sends a firm message to illegal downloaders, which may be enough of a reward.”

Hardly. The RIAA fucked themselves again. When people read what vengeful dickwipes they are, they’re going to download more, not less.

Aren’t there better solutions to stopping file sharing? If there are websites out there offering illegal services, shouldn’t those be who the government, lawyers and labels focus on? Fine the folks who start the websites the obscene amounts and maybe they’ll go away. Insist that e-mail services stop allowing the transferal of music files.

This seems like it should be easily solved … no idea why it’s taking forever for the music industry to work things out. I, for one, buy all my music. Hard copy, at the record store. Downloading is for casual listeners who don’t think of music as art, but only as entertainment.

If we take away all the illegal file sharing sites, I have to think that record stores will do much better. iTunes will see a slight boost in sales, but they’re blowing it right now, too, by uping their prices. Who wants to pay $12 for just files when they can buy the actual CD for maybe a dollar more?

Also, I think labels would do right by issuing CD singles again. Lots of ‘em. And, obviously, start selling albums for a much lower price … $11 or so on average would work wonders for the music industry.

Mostly, I’d say that the problem is that the labels, lawyers and government aren’t going after the right people. Show these websites no mercy already!

1. Music should be free? Well, its not free to make music. CD’s don’t magically appear out of nothingness do they? Maybe peanut butter and toothpaste should be free as well. Doesn’t Proctor & Gamble have enough money?

2. “Bands make all their money from touring”- Again, crap. Touring has always been a way to sell more records. This is where the artists actually make their money. Bands actually earn LESS per concert ticket then they do per cd sold. After you take into account the promoters, facilities, road crews, ticket services (the band gets chrged too, not just us!) gas, electric, insurance (thanks to what happened with Dime and Great White, those fees have gone way up), security and travel expenses coupled with the fact that the record company is now taking a much larger slice of the touring and merch pie to recoup their recording and promotion investment, the average band is earning less than a dollar a ticket. A lot of these guys, names you know, are earning less than $50 grand a year from touring. These are names you know, bands on the level of Theory Of Deadman and Shinedown. How many of you would willingly seperate yourselves from your family for most of the year, living out of suitcase, eating crap food and spending most of your year on a grimy tour bus for only $50 grand? Not me!!!

The only way to fix this is if we start locking these people up. Illegal downloading of music and movies is destroying the entertainment industry.

Fuck the RIAA! I havent´t paid for a record in well over 10 years and I´m not about to start now so I can watch how “artists” flaunt their money on MTV cribs!

Typical record company bullshit! All of the geniuses employed in the recording industry cannot come up with a unified way of delivering music via the web, so they spend money to punish and make examples out of individuals. We owe it to the artists to purchase the music, but prosecuting the “little guy” is wrong. Go after the owners of the websites; you morons!

For starters, using the excuse that you will illegally download music until they lower the price is a form of extortion.

For those of you that asked when it was illegal to copy music from an lp to a tape, or off the radio, it always has been illegal. When you buy a dvd, cd or an mp3, you are not buying the actual music, you are buying a liscence to use that music or movie for a specific purpose and those liscences have NEVER included copying. Remember those FBI warnings at the beginning of virtually every VHS tape ever made? As for copying off of the radio or tv? Also illegal, as there has been no liscence given.

Technically, selling used cd’s also violates the liscence, although the courts ruled that when a liscence to play the music forever is sold, the licence may be transferred.

No one ever enforced consumer taping because there was no dicernable negative impact on music or movie sales from home taping.

What many of you don’t remember, is that back in the 80’s when DAT was first released, it was met with strong opposition from the recording industry because of the ability to tape with virtually no loss of quality.

Look at it this way people. Almost 9 out of 10 of your reading this have a job. Most of you work very hard at your job as I do mine. I know that none of you would react too favorably if you were told you had to work for free. A lot of you reading this are unemployed right now, and many of you lost your jobs because of declining sales of your company’s product, be it cars, mortgage loans, tv’s or golf clubs. This is what’s happening in the entertainment industry. I personally know several people who are unemplyed today as a direct result of illegal downloading. These are people that now cannot pay their mortages or buy cars or golf clubs anymore, which may cause you to eventually lose your job. Stealing is stealing, and no one benefits from it in the long run.

and green day could care less. so punk.

Guys, I just did a little research.

In order for a crime to be considered under RICO, it has to meet a few tests:

1. There has to be evidence of criminal activity- Well, stealing music is well, stealing.

2. There have to be multiple parties acting in an organized manner. File sharing meets the organized crime test as there are multiple parties acting in concert to commit these crimes over an over again. To the tune of millions every year.

If the federal government were to decide to pursue RICO charges against any of these downloaders, any subpeana of ip addresses and internet accounts would be honored, as refusal by the isp’s would constitute said isp’s being complicit.

Since a RICO conviction carries a penalty of life in prison without the possibility of parole, I would think that you would only need to go after 5 or 10 of the major downloaders to end this crap. Will doing this stop downloading completely? No, but it will sure make it not nearly as big of a problem. If you knew that you could go away forever, would you steal music?

While I think that a $1.92 million settlement is excessive, I’m amazed by some of the posts I’m reading here. Record companies have every right to charge whatever they want for music, and you as a consumer have every right not to pay those prices. Even if Green Day is a “socially progressive” band it doesn’t mean that they should stick up for people who steal from them. And that’s exactly what it is. You can’t justify your theft by saying that “music and art can’t be controlled” or “There’s no crime because I’m just sticking it to a greedy faceless corporation.” Greedy faceless corporations employ people and buy the goods and services that allow people like you and I to have jobs.

Websites that share files should be held at fault. Not the person downloading the track.. This lawsuit is the equivalent of leaving new albums on the sidewalk and expecting people not to take them…

Finally, a lawsuit that will garner some attention. It isn’t fair the the record labels go under when they are the ones paying the costs in expectation of REVENUE coming in through the royalties per song. This lady says she doesn’t have the money- too bad- you stole, you owe it! I don’t have sympathy for people who thought they were ‘doing nothing wrong.’ She isn’t the one paying for the artwork, the recordings, the tours, promotion fees, corporate business fees, etc. It’s business Ms. Minnesota Mom! Time to wake up and hear the music… legally!

The websites that allow file sharing are not at fault, although it is only a technicality. is Saying that unfortunately is like saying that Smith & Wesson is responsible for a certain percentage of murders in this country. File sharing sites can be used to distribute uncopyrighted items. It just seems that most of the people who use these sites use it to steal. Do we outlaw ski masks because bank robbers use them? Blaming the file sharing sites or blaming the record companies is just a lame excuse so people don’t have to accept blame for their crimes.

Keep on downloading… bring this corrupt industry to it’s knees. You can’t put the genie back in the bottle. The old business model is dead … wake up.

Well, it’s good to know they’re catching the real criminals. The REAL scum of the earth, y’know?

“How many of you would willingly seperate yourselves from your family for most of the year, living out of suitcase, eating crap food and spending most of your year on a grimy tour bus for only $50 grand?”

I would.

Why should we pay for music? It’s absurd. Artist are still artists. They are supposed to starve, and earn their money playing live like it has been in the last 10.000 years! Their work is beautiful, but the value of a copy is the same as a photo of the Mona Lisa. Zero.

I gladly pay for a live performance. The seatings are a scarce good. But I will not pay for copies of music, or copies of paintings or anything with 0 marginal cost. If they want me to pay for it, find a way to distribute that can’t be copied and make it a scarce good.

RIAA should be ashamed for going after her for only 24 songs. I agree with the previous post about the remainder of songs not meaning anything. They in fact proved that music is disposable. The judge should have dumped his earbuds for awhile and really looked at this issue. All songs or no songs, that is the question…and only 24 songs made the cut?

RIAA should be ashamed for going after her for only 24 songs. I agree with the previous post about the remainder of songs not meaning anything. They in fact proved that music is disposable. The judge should have dumped his earbuds for awhile and really looked at this issue. All songs or no songs, that is the question…and only 24 songs made the cut?

And if the industry had just been smart enough to embrace the new technology and the change that came along with it, they wouldn’t have to sue a mother of four for $2 million, and make the general public hate them even more.

That’s how you do business and retain customers, for sure.

Pirate all the music you want. It will never be stopped. Screw the record companies. They dont do anything anyway. They just sucker hard working bands in to doing all the work and then expect to get paid for doing nothing. Record companies distribute music and market it. Thats it. And they are doing a pretty piss poor job at it. They deserve to go out of business. They actually need to pay us for listening to all the crap they are pumping out. Support local music and your favorites artists by going to their shows.

Oh, and to the Faulty Logic retard.
Bands are not getting less for the concert ticket sales then they are for record sales. They are not making less then a dollar a ticket. If a band is making less then a dollar a ticket at their shows then they are just plain stupid and need to hire a better business manager. Yes, record companies are taking a larger piece of the concert sales and merch, if a band is stupid enough to sign a contract to let them do it.

If the RIAA can sue $80,000 a song, then I should make my own horrible song and let people “steal” it. Then I just sue them all. How can anyone believe that 80,000 a song is justified? This lady would have wage garnishments if she can’t settle, bankruptcy doesn’t protect you from this. Even universal music group posts videos of songs on youtube but if you download them the riaa will sue you so much that they are scaring people to settle. I haven’t bought a song/album in years. Stealing 2 albums physically from a music store would carry less consequence.

If just 300,000 people were caught with just 100 “stolen” songs and were sued 80,000 each, it would amount to 2.4 trillion dollars. Please tell me how 2.4 trillion dollars in revenue damage was done to the music industry?

In 2006 the US government got 2.4 trillion in revenue.

Strangely enough, I dont find it Ironic that on the day I hear about this fine, I receive your newest issue with Adam Lambert on the cover. Dont you think that if the music industry worked a little harder to find the truly talented musicians out there, that the people would gladly pay for their music? Adam Lambert was forced onto the masses without any original ideas of his own, any original songs of his own. If you keep shoving this crap down peoples throats, they will have to have his album at any cost.

Kev | 6/19/2009, 4:18 pm EST
THIS IS BULLSHIT
“Websites that share files should be held at fault. Not the person downloading the track.. This lawsuit is the equivalent of leaving new albums on the sidewalk and expecting people not to take them…”

WEBSITES THAT SHARE FILES AREN’T THE PROBLEM. P2P FILE NETWORKS CAN’T BE SHUT DOWN LIKE A WEBSITE BECAUSE THE MUSIC IS ON THE USERS COMPUTER, NOT A MAIN DATABASE

I wonder if any of the people over at the RIAA with their heads logded up their asses actually expect to see this money…

tyler – first off nice caps douchebag. doesn’t get your point across any stronger. hurray with your p2p knowledge, but the second part of his statement makes sense. as long as the music is accessible for free, how could you expect someone not to download it? no solution in site. ISPs should send out notices to whoever illegally downloads music. it should be regulated by them in conjunction with the RIAA. then cut off a person’s internet service when they violate the rules again. that’s a start.

Well if the government thinks they can win, then they might as well say we can’t let friends borrow cds.

Hell, we shouldn’t be allowed to buy recorded music, cause GOD FORBID someone else hears it.

Dear Music Industry,

Grow up, get with the times, millions of people download FREE music every day. It can’t be stopped unless you kill the internet. I suggest you find an alternate solution.

Sincerely,

Common Sense

This story further proves my point about record labels. Not just EMI, but Sony, Universal and Warner Bros. All of them are greedy, selfish bastards. $80,000 per song???? Seriously??? This is how you set an example? Well we can make you suffer just the same. How about we just don’t buy music PERIOD? We won’t download them to avoid getting sued, but there’s no law saying we MUST buy music. Imagine music sales plummeting to 0%. They would be forced to change their ways quickly, to stop bullying us. If we want to make a difference, we have to hit them where it hurts. How do you think segregation ended? Black people refused to get on a bus until they could be guaranteed that they would not be told to sit on the back of a bus. When the public transportation industry saw how deep they were hit without an important demographic providing their income, they changed their tone. We should do the same. The record industry will be on our side only when we remind them how badly they really need us— with our wallets.

This Is Lower Than Dog Doooo!!!!

Let me guess…These file sharing internet sites is most likely owned, set up and disguised by the same RIAA crminals that will be receiving the $$$. This is nothing more than a huge RIAA conspiracy to degrade the same music loving public who for decades & decades paid $$$ for lackluster albums filled with crapo filler which included a hit or two. Funny how the RIAA hasn’t successfully sued, and much less ever gotten any $$$ from the internet sites who provide the grounds & access for people to download music. It’s becoming too obvious that these sites are setups and a huge conspiracy of entrapment to con unsuspecting people into downloading.

Ya’ll know what? FUCK THEM ALL! Buy “used” Cds at local used Cd stores or internet sites for as little as $1.00 or less and the RIAA will NOT get a penny from music lovers. I don’t download music anyway, but I do buy tons of used, Mint Condition/Like New/Very Good- condition Cds, [many still shrink wrapped] from sellers at half.com/ebay/amazon.com and save hundreds of $$$ a year. I stopped paying full price and get my Cds for a tiny fraction cost. I used to purchase lots & lots of Cds at $9.99 or higher for years and wound up with crappy filler for a hit or two. I stopped doing that!

$ 80,000 for a Richard Marx song is a SCAM! huge fraud man

Hey, Jeff, nice lack of caps, douche bag. At least the other guy knows where the shift key is. I’m not a grammar Nazi, but if you’re going to be, check yourself first.

Also, screw the music industry these days. I’m a musician and if I was offered a record deal, this is the main reason I would say no. Fuck the music industry.

This is terrible. Targeting this poor woman is absurd. She’s probably just an everyday mother of four who doesn’t have 2 million dollars! This could ruin someones life! Fuck you RIAA! This honestly disgusts me in every way. If you were to sue her for anything, it should be the 99 cents the song is worth, not 80 grand a song, that honestly makes no sense.

Grow up RIAA, P2P downloading will never be stopped, and targeting helpless people like this is terrible and ultimately pointless. I do download from iTunes and buy CDs, but that’s because I feel some sort of sense of pleasure and accomplishment, but that doesn’t mean I’m against file sharing. I do understand that the industry is going down, and the whole “working for free” thing, but c’mon.

nine inch nails has proposed the idea that people that like them now may not have liked them if they had to buy a cd, a cd which the band would have gotten 4cents per cd from. but because of p2p sights, people get to listen and come into contact with more music.

the smashing pumpkins released Machina II on line for free distribution.

Most cd sales profit goes to the the record labels anyways, the already rich-don’t get off their ass-9 digit income dirt bags anyways… so a cd doesnt necessarily support an artist…

yea a record label is important, but the record label execs could also lower the amount of income they THINK they DESERVE…that might help the company too…

This makes me so proud to be an American to see my $7,000 in federal taxes paid for last year go into this legal system…. what a waste of all US taxpayers money. How is $24 in damages equivalent to $1.9 Million, poor lady will probably have to declare bankruptcy which is even a more drag on society only to help out those corporations in need.

I know a company who years ago was slapped with a $900K fine for improper disposal of hazardous material (how is illegally downloading songs worse) also I know people who have gotten DUIs and didn’t pay a $1.9 million fine..

Go after those sites that allow this activity and do not monitor illegal file sharing of copyrighted material….. it’s like putting the drug user in jail for 25 years while letting the known drug dealer continue to do what he does…….

I’m against downloading music illegally, but $1.92 million is WAY too much, come on man, who exactly did she hurt? Yeah, it probably caused legal album sales to hurt and in return everybody in the music biz got paid less, but did anyone end up in a wheelchair? Did anyone die? Lose a loved one? Millions of people download songs illegally, why are they specifically picking on a poor mother of four? Why not go after ALL the file-sharing sites out there? I don’t hear the RIAA planning to sue the owners of Limewire. Nor did they even bother to target the very website where the Minnesota mom got all her songs from. How “fair” of them to go after someone who probably can’t even afford a decent lawyer. And I’d like to know what jury agreed to this travesty, probably all former record execs?

I agree with you Mike L.

Down with Dante Stallworth

Pure bull. I don’t see how any court could justify $80,000 in damages per song. Its ludicrous! I don’t even download from free music sites and this still pisses me off. Another example of how record companies are ruining music with their money grubbing.

This may be a Pyrrhic victory for the RIAA, but does anyone consider how an Artist pays his rent, buys food, gets medical care? When y’all are willing to offer your trade for free to all takers, you might have a point. Otherwise, file sharing and disc burning is just another type of theft.

Good! These piracy file sharers suck! They are assholes who screw over musicians.

That is absolutely ridiculous!

Proof that the record industry doesn’t give a damn about music or the people that listen to it. They just want to screw the money out of consumers whatever way possible. It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to realize that refusing to lower download prices in response to a growing demand for larger music libraries to fill mp3 players with ever growing capacities was bad for business. It’s one of the fundamental rules of capitalism: if you screw the consumer, eventually the consumer will screw you. Now the record industry is going to hell. And no one cares except for the labels.

that sux and all but thats the price ya pay. I stopped downloading years ago, being a musician id rather support the artist i like by purchasing there music as i would expect the same in return, if i cant afford it i borrow it from a friend.

Until each and every one of you learns a skill/trade/craft and offers it up, free of charge, to each and every person who wants it, you should keep your damn mouths shut about how record companies and musicians don’t deserve to get paid.

I never saw so many idiots with such a sense of entitlement. Walk into a store, load up a cart, and try to walk out without paying. When you go to court, tell the judge that you didn’t think you should have to pay for anything because the store is worth millions and they should not get another cent from consumers. If you have internet access in prison, make sure to come back here and tell us all how the judge reacted.

LOL!!!! That was a seriously funny point you made there, Jim.

Cool, now I know to boycott Green Day, Janet Jackson, Godsmack and Richard Marx.

Jim,

You’re confusing the issue. You don’t get fined 1.92 million dollars for stealing a CD. The punishment completely outweighs the crime. The RIAA is making an example of this poor woman who is doing the same thing as millions of others.

Jim, I hope you get fined $4 million dollars, or thrown in prison, the next time you jay-walk or speed. You know, let the punishment fit the crime and all. Douchebag.

I know how to get money from those who share music/videos through youtube, google, yahoo ILLEGALLY (without owner’s permission)

I will only ask for few hundreds dollars not thousands.
Cool Denm It

For those who never taped music from the radio, a ball game/program from television or read a newspaper/book you didn’t pay for please stand up and slap yourself. Because you are a bloody liar.

I hope they know this will maybe stop a few people but the majority will continue to download songs. Downloading songs allows them to discover the artists music and in turn they go to the concerts. Thats where the artists deserve the money. They all make a damn good living even without the record sales. I know people that would do it for 10,000 a year

So they should simply record albums, put them out there for free, and tour for their money?

Do us all a favor and promise to NEVER run for public office. You’d make the Great Depression look like a bake sale…

I have feelings on the whole subject, we all do, but they’re irrelevant. No, this is not going to stop kids from downloading, and if you think it will, you’re somehow both a record mogul, and niave. If we can all resign to our fate of destroying this planet of natural resources, because we all realize there is no way any of us are going to be responsible enough to stop ourselves, then I think four law suits here and there should not be expected to have anymore effect. (no I do not believe global warming, but everyone realizes we’re using up the earth). My point is, it’s over. Maybe not just yet, but it is. All these lawsuits do is disenfrancise the kids who are already rebelling against “the system” in the only “unacceptable” way they can, and strengthen there resolve to keep doing it. And I promise everyone who is here bitching about artists rights and how it’s stealing say all this because they either a) can afford cds or b) just do not buy that many outside the country section of walmart anyway. The biz has changed, like it or not, the issue is dead, move on. Besides, I just checked my itunes account and without even realizing i have spent thirty dollars on Ryan Adams alone. I’m in college, so that seems about right since he actually deserves to be rich.

Of course I’ll trade him the riches for the babe.

sooo.. this is telling me that going getting drunk and driving a car and killing a pedestrian might have less consequences than downloading music?!?!

Are you people speed reading the internet or something. A JURY awarded the amount, not anyone else. Where do you get the idea anyone sued for that much?

She got fined $80,000 for one Richard Marx song?…If she has to pay that much for one song,at least download the song from a artist or band that everyone knows.None of his crap…

my friend nearly got killed by an insane truck driver and his settlement was less than what this mother of four has to pay. C’mon, Richard Marx! This jury should all be burned salem witch style! Plus, it just shows how little artists have over thier work, record companies own it! All bands should go the Radiohead route; produce, promote, leak and profit off of your own album!

@Mandela

Its not going to stop. Everyone knows that. What I keep seeing are people bitching and feigning outrage because someone got caught doing it, and they now have to pay the price. It’s not like the Federal Gov’t was keeping this whole thing a secret. The warnings are everywhere! If someone didn’t see them or simply chose to ignore them, then that sounds like their problem. Just like driving a car: You get caught speeding, you pay the fine. The speed limit signs are everywhere, and every driver knows that there is a police presence out there. If you don’t want to do the time, don’t do the damn crime.

Is $80,000 too much for one song? Absolutely it is. Betcha it’ll make at least a few hundred people reconsider before they steal that next album. If you can’t afford it, get a job. CD’s are an average of $10 for the most part, and cheaper if they’re used, so don’t give me that shit about not being able to afford it. Do without it until you get some cash. Being broke is a lame ass excuse for stealing.

If you’re hungry, you go to a store for food, right? Do you steal that too? Or do you pay for it? SAME difference, with one exception: You are anonymous online for the most part. Most people dont have the balls to physically steal something from a store because the chances of getting caught are MUCH higher, not to mention the humiliation factor. This woman got caught stealing, despite years worth of warnings that she could be caught and heavily fined. Tell me why I should feel sorry for her.

Dear Faulty logic,
who really cares if you’re only making 50000 a year making music, you’re making a living off of your art, I make it a point to give out my records. Maybe after the first 50 grand, you lose touch with your inner artist that would rather have people like your music that pay for it. In my opinion, the record industry has had this coming for a long time.
So ya, maybe the record company is having such a great time, but the music industry can still thrive if they find a way to get music to the CUSTOMERS, through a reasonable and affordable medium, which CD’s no longer qualify as. By the way, ITunes makes bank.

People with the name ‘Richard’, also sometimes go by the name ‘Dick’.

So Richard Marx, can also be known as Dick Marks.

to all you who download illegally: Thanks for ruining the music biz

Is stealing music wrong? Yes. Is $1.92 million justifiable in this case? Absolutely NOT. If the RIAA was truly serious about making illegal downloads history, they would go after the people that make downloading the songs in the first place possible, the websites that allow you to do it. You successfully prosecuted ONE person out of the millions and millions of people each day who do it. Please tell me how the problem is fixed? The $80,000 per song that the woman is forced to recuperate has already been made useless because in the time it took me to type this, a hoard of people across the globe have downloaded songs worth 1,000 times that amount each if you were to calculate it in the same way the RIAA did. Yeah, they’re making an example out of her, but an example that means squat and they know it. They just get a joy out of humiliating the little people. This is no different than giving someone who bought illegal drugs 25 to life while letting the dealer run free, as someone else pointed out. If it’s available, people will always take it, regardless of its illicitness. You have to kill the weed at the root, you don’t just pull the plant and hope it never grows back. And maybe illegal downloads would be a not-so-common occurrence if the record industry would finally get with the times and realize that the internet is NOT going away anytime soon, so they might as well embrace it and be better off for it. Hanging on to your old ways for dear life will not make people follow your lead. If anything, you’re alienating them even further.

Yeah, THAT’S reasonable…

First, of all, I thought the RIAA said it was going to stop suing people since it 1)has obviously failed and 2)alienated their customers. Second, if stealing music was really wrong then all copyrights would be returned to the songwriters and artists and the record companies after a certain amount of time and proper royalties would be made to the artists – you wouldn’t have these whorish copyright holders of songs that aren’t theirs trying to keep the gravy train going. Third, since radio was ruined “hearing” music has become the same as “stealing” music. Fourth, the only firm message it sends is that if you want to avoid giving the a-holes at the RIAA a dime, you also have to screw the artists who you would like to give a few dollars to.

CD’s arent affordable? What a cop-out. Get a job. They’ve been in this very same price range for about the last 15 years. Like I said earlier….if you can’t afford to buy a CD, do without it until you can. Whether you choose to believe it or not, the record industry has not changed much in decades. Before the internet and the advent of file sharing, I bet you had no problem shelling out the money for CD’s. Now that you know it can be had for free, the record industry is all of a sudden “evil” and is holding everyone hostage because….*gasp*….they are trying to make a living just like everyone else!!! Heaven forbid!

It all goes back to the sense of entitlement that I mentioned in my first post. Its free, its illegal, and someone got caught. Lets bring out the torches and pitchforks and get an angry mob going, because no one told us that stealing is a crime punishable by hefty fines and/or prison time. Good job!

“Caution: Off-topic comments will be deleted.”

Fair enough. Let’s see if that’s true. The timer starts…Now!

I’m so proud now to be a citizen of a country that bullies single mothers around. I consider this nothing more or less than a bullying tactic. File sharers are just going to laugh at the absurdity of it all and keep downloading away. Many are not even going to take it seriously. The RIAA can just continue their belly laughing, back patting, and general celebrating. They’ve earned it. No wonder they’re becoming more and more hated!

Those Assholes! why make some mother pay 2 million dollars for twenty-four songs? A perfect example of what the world is coming to: greed. Do they even realize that in all of Jay Leno’s career he hasn’t touched a cent of the money he made off of the tonight show?! He’s only used the money he made off of his comedy tour’s and he still has a parking garage full of classic cars! Imagine if musicians gave their music for free and made their money on tours… i guarantee that they will make more money than ever before. So this I say to the record company: get over the fact that millions of people love music and are willing to go outside of the legal system for it. And by the way, it doesn’t take a bio-engineer to realize that $24, in no circumstances, equals $2,000,000! Stop picking on innocent people and go after the real criminals! I mean, it’s only the equivalent of stealing two CD’s! And yet you’re making this woman pay $80,000 a song? How can you call that freedom? Screw the record industry! Did God really intend for us to tax each other? What next? Am I going to get sued for not paying to pray in a church? Why not go after the real criminals: the drug dealers, rapists, kidnappers, murderers, Richard Marx… I guess what I’m trying to say is that this is unjust persecution, plain and simple. It’s a demonstration designed to destroy someone’s life to make an example out of them, and we should not stand for it.

Dear Music Industry,

Grow up, get with the times, millions of people download FREE music every day. It can’t be stopped unless you kill the internet. I suggest you find an alternate solution. You know how many people have upwards of 10,000 songs and yet they target and make an example out of a poor lady with probably the smallest music collection I’ve ever heard of since Napster.

Sincerely,

Comm on Sense

P.S.- 80 grand for a Janet Jackson song?! What?! The lady who was caught must be regretting this

What these morons at the RIAA apparently fail to realize is that A.) The only people that actually stop illegal downloads are the ones that are caught and/or prosectuted, B.) They’re surely burning money with legal fees, kinda counterproductive given their shitty bottom lines, C.) Those who haven’t been caught won’t be deterred by this, it’ll only make them feel better about file sharing, and D.) taxpayers are paying much of the administrative costs for cases that a majority of people find as a waste.

Point is, if these idiots want to try and stop the unstoppable change that’s occurred in file sharing while refusing to admit culpability for letting this happen with little to no foresight, they’re better off suing and (hopefully not) shutting down torrent clients and other sites that facilitate free file sharing.

I can speak for most of my fellow musicians when I say that we view file sharing as an OVERWHELMING positive. Unless you’re already a hugely successful act, this increases exposure, which increases tour and merch revenue, which puts more food on the table.

These hefty fines are ridiculous. Even though she is technically guilty of stealing, it should be treated as if she stole anything worth $24. She does not represent the entire internet that pirates musisic. She represents 1 individual that stole $24 worth of music. Therefore MAY THE PUNISHMENT FIT THE CRIME. I’m not a lawyer but I would go out on a limb and say that stealing $24 isn’t that big of deal.

If they want to crack down. Crack down and charge people for the crime of stealing exactly the dollar amount they have stolen. Not some fabricated amount that makes absolutely no sense.

Every single day people bend and break the law and EVERYONE has broken it from one time to another. Have you ever jaywalked? have you ever seen a yellow light and entered on red? Have you ever crossed lanes without signaling? In my opinion the law lacks one simple thing… Common Sense.

The jury should have stepped back, analyzed the entire situation and realized that this lady isn’t the entire internet that downloads songs illegally. She is one individual that illegally downloaded 24 songs and should be punished accordingly.

$80K per song? Isn’t the fact she downloaded a Richard Marx song punishment enough!?!??

Score another for the Recording Conspiracy

“Thou shall not steal.”

I don´t know who Richard Marx is, but i´m ILLEGALLY downloadong one of his songs right now. I want to know how a $80.000 song sounds.

The R.I.A.A. embrace ALL that is
wrong with “Corporate America”.
Artists, yes.
R.I.A.A., NEVER.

Who did she give the songs to, or how were they copied out of her file sharing folder? I dunno, I like file sharing, I don’t do it now, though I used to, and really, I think the only way it affects an artist is if the artist puts out a really bad album, which even “great” artists are known to do from time to time. What happens, the fans get ripped off. See Metallica’s St. Anger. I don’t like Metallica to begin with, though to not be able to sample the album for free outside of the radio or MTV seems like artist insecurity.

Brad put it in perspective well. 24 dollars worth of music. This is ludicrous.

The penalty is definitely too high, but think about it: If you stole say 2 CD’s from a store, which could roughly be 24 songs, and you get caught on the way out the door. Do you honestly think you’re gonna get a $24 fine and a slap on the wrist? Better yet, do you think thats all it SHOULD be?

If the punishment fit the crime in every case, think of how high the crime rate would be. Put a full minute behind that thought and get back to me later.

(For those not smart enough to figure it out, it’s called a DETERRENT)

The RIAA should be put on both the Axis of Evil List and as a State Sponsor for Terrorism. $1.92 million is more than just a little extreme, its insanity and the court reflects that notion in its decision. As if she could ever pay back that amnount of money. What country is this, Turkey?!

“to all you who download illegally: Thanks for ruining the music biz”

You’re welcome!

i think its way to much…
maybe $10 a song but $80.000 (o.O;)

also downloading isnt wrong only uploading. thats whats ive been told.

You’ve been stupidly misinformed

Stupidity has no limit.
And your laws are so dumb, why asking someone for such money, just because of bad quality mp3, it’s absurd. Normally, I like absurd, but here, it doesn’t make me laugh.
I pray that your laws do not contaminate others countries.

Absolutely INSANE fine. Wanting to send a message is one thing. Wanting the entire country to throw rocks at your home is another. I’ll bet Richard Marx doesn’t see $1.00 of that fine.

does the riaa expect us to take this seriosly?
richard marx… who is that anyway his c.d. is prolly worth wat 2 bucks. how is it even logical to fine someone 2 million…. for and artist that over 98 percent of the country prolly never even herd of.

record companies are greedy imbeciles. Anyone arguing in favor of jailing this person should think of the artists. How much do you guys think the artists make off of a cd? 50 cents? 1 dollar? You know the real crooks are the record companies. They should be fined this ridiculous amount, not a mother of four.

If I were her I’d download thousands of tracks and burn them to CD’s and then hand them out to everyone I know and encourage them to do the same. $1.92 Million in fines. I’d wait until I got the fine up to $100 million and then go bankrupt. In the mean time I’d send them $1 a month in pennies.

This is crazy and it just goes to show that corporations are running this country. For me it’s not about stealing because no actual physical property was taken, it costs them absolutely nothing when someone copies their song and if they were true artists they would simply love the fact that people are enjoying their music. File sharing isn’t going anywhere and hopefully if we are lucky it will cleanse the music industry of those who are just in it for the money.

The whole Music industry is a racket run by crooks. They use nicked lyrics then sell them to tied artists.

Wow this is hard to believe…Is this what America has come to? The RIAA disgusts me. I think the Recording Industry Association of America should change their name and remove America from it. I think the Recording Industry Association of A$$holes fits better.

I read a post that stated that the price of CDs has been the same for 20 years…that’s part of the problem right there. What other industry would sue people for the equivalent of protecting price fixing? They want to charge $20 and people don’t want to pay it. The stealing is a result (for MOST, but some will steal no matter what.) and once started,realistically will never be stopped. After all, all technologies are eventually repriced in response to advances, etc…and “artist royalties”
make up a small amount of that price. The RIAA would be smarter to reevaluate it’s business model in order to be more competitive than throw away money on lawsuits. It’s funny, we supposedly live in a “capitalist” country, but when businesses start to fail due to market changes, competition, plain incompetence or CORRUPT business practices, what is the first thing they do? Yep, go begging for a hand out or some such to save their ass…I say they need to evolve or die.

Here’s a business model: Artists put up their own sites to sell their music directly, while using the internet (Networking, even *gasp* Filesharing!) to promote and advertise. Artists charge a reasonable amount, sell their catalog, including singles, rare tracks and live show recordings. People really contect to and literally support their favorite artists. Artists unionize to distribute hard copies to record stores. Perhaps set up a fund out of that for retired musicians, etc. worthy causes. No more RIAA middleman, pork fat and B.S. What do you think?

I know the point’s been made before but I just keep going back to the fact that “file sharing” is nothing new at all. Back in the 70s and 80s it consisted of taping albums from friends or the radio. And it was VERY widespread, we ALL did it. We also purchased t-shirts, concert tix, etc. Of course this was back when one or two Jaguars & a mansion was enough for most rock stars!

I just think a $1.92 mil judgment against an individual is a ridiculous solution to a complicated problem. I do believe that artists deserve compensation for their work but wouldn’t it be more effective to go after the sites? Suing individuals just seems bitchy and vindictive.

That must be one stupid jury, of course most are not too bright. I think jury duty should be manditory and you get picked randomly by computer. You would get paid for your time, not some crummy $25 per day. Also, no picking the jury. Ya get whats ya get. That way I think we would get, maybe, smarter jurys. Not a bunch of old ladies and other none working people. How else can you explain that award amount? Stupid people, stupid jury. I also agree that CDs should be 4 or 5 bucks. People would buy in droves, they would make up Aany loss in volume. We all know that CDs cost nothing to burn, for sure a lot less then a record or tape, so why so much? Of course, downloading is wrong, I do not do it, but I see how others might feel they are owed something for being over charged before downloading was possible.

I do think that $80,000 for a Richard Marx song or any ridiculous fine for downloading but–what downloaders seem to forget is that by pirating it is not just the stars that do not get richer. You have many little people who lose out and possibly need second jobs to survive in this economy.

Wait- Did she just download or download & share them?

Whoa wait…lets do the math here. You actually would pay $10-$14 for a full album CD at your local store. All of these songs are at a full bit rate of 1,411.2 kbit/s per song.

so..TECHNICALLY….. if you downloaded a song illegally you are actually getting mostly either 128 kbps or 192kbps. The mother should actually pay the punishement amount divided from the original full bit rate of the song.

This woman got a 1.2 million dollar fine for 24 songs, and today a postal worker who stole 3,000 netflix DVD’s (actual disks, mind you), will get no more than a 38,000 fine. Anyone else think the RIAA is completely full of crap and the court system is misguided in giving them subpoena authority?

Take away the restrictive DRM attached to most of this music and watch sales go through the roof.

How can you expect somebody to feel good about purchasing a cd when the RIAA tries to dictate in what ways you are allowed to listen to that cd. Do any of you remember when Sony cds were installing root-kits on peoples computers once the cd was inserted into the drive?

Stardock released a game with no copyright protection on the disc, no cd key required, you didnt even need the disc in the drive to play. Guess what…sales on that game broke many records.

It may not solve all the problems, but stop punishing the people that do pay for your cds if you ever expect sales to pick up. Stop inflating your losses, stop suing your fans. Suing a mother of 4 for 24 songs is absurd. And to the dumb ass talking about locking these people up. Great idea, because our jails aren’t crowded enough with non violent offenders.

Our countries priority’s are as fucked up as your average crackhead.