Guilty: Woman to Pay Record Co. $9,250 for Each of 24 Illegally Downloaded Songs

embedded by Embedded Video

Bookmark and Share

In the first US trial to challenge the illegal downloading of music on the Internet, a single mother from Minnesota was ordered Thursday to pay $220,000 for sharing 24 songs online.

October 4, 2007 at 9:09 pm - WCCO-TV
Dateline: Duluth, Minnesota
Minnetonka_Mark   October 4th, 2007 - 10:17 pm

I will boycott purchasing recorded music for the rest of my life.

Tim   October 5th, 2007 - 8:53 am

This is pathetic. RIAA is the Nazi party of our time in the recording industry. They will never see a dime of that money. As if anyone has the means to pay 220,000 dollars. I sure as hell would not pay and I’d basically go on a warpath to fight it. To hell with asshole recording artists that are that cold in the soul.

trent   October 5th, 2007 - 9:07 am

How about we rally behind Jamie and boycott the music industry. Never by another file or CD. They think they can sue us and then we will come crawling back begging to buy more of their crap music. Sales were down 14% from last year. Why? Because the music sucks. That is the only reason.

Jeff   October 5th, 2007 - 11:16 am

If music sucks, why is it being stolen? Assuming the response is that it is overpriced, then why fight the man over prices set by markets? I agree music companies put out trash, but I don’t understand how people justify stealing. I can sympathize for a starving person stealing food, but punk kids taking items that aren’t necessities is illogical. What next, steal a flat screen because it is perceived to be priced too high? Housing prices near DC are 40% higher than what I believe they should be, so I’ll just occupy an empty one. Good luck on the boycott.

Maynard Hartman   October 5th, 2007 - 1:21 pm

I will NEVER! buy another CD…Period! These disgusting parasites should not only be ashamed…they should never sleep again (although they probably will). How will this woman afford to pay? Disgusting…F*&^ you artists that sat back and let your corporate masters do you greedy dirty-work.

Maynard Hartman   October 5th, 2007 - 1:25 pm

BTW Jeff, you can’t afford to buy a Piscasso but you enjoy copies of it don’t you…well maybe not since you seem to be so gutteral and base…but the rest of us do.

Maynard Hartman   October 5th, 2007 - 1:35 pm

One more comment: I was going to buy Joni Mitchell’s new CD and Anne Lenox’s new CD today…But I’m not going to. Just wanted Arista and who ever is distributing JM’s CD to know that not one more cent from me will they get. Maybe it’s time artists stand up and say something…

Stan   October 5th, 2007 - 1:48 pm

The last CD I bought was The Wall from Pink Floyd. I haven’t seen or heard anything worth paying for (or downloading) since.
So called “hip hop artists” live in mansions, they drive fancy cars and wear tons of diamonds.
I guess junk music (if you can call that music) will always make money and don’t worry, the obsolete “recording industry” will always get their unfair share.

J-SHO   October 5th, 2007 - 2:09 pm

This is horrifying. The price is just ungodly high! I will never buy a cd again… f*** the music industry, I’m stickin with radio

pk   October 5th, 2007 - 3:59 pm

godbless radiohead.

1911A1   October 5th, 2007 - 4:04 pm

Let me get this straight, several people seem to be upset that the record companies, publishers, artists and others involved in the production of music for your entertainment, expect to be paid for their service/product. These people have some nerve to ask you to pay to receive the benefits of their work. How dare they? You should all get free music, groceries, lodging and the car of your choice because the “man” has been keeping you down and that’s why your too poor to pay for music. It could also be that you’re worthless individuals that can’t or won’t support yourselves, and resent people that can and do.

Bert from Holland   October 5th, 2007 - 5:18 pm

This fine is not in proportion to the crime. Most numbers can nowadays be downloaded for a buck a piece. For the 1700 numbers in her file the lady should have been made to pay $ 1,700, with a fine of the same order of magnitude at the most. Absurd to fine someone 220,000 dollar for 24 * 3 minutes of music. This verdict indeed sends the message across the world, namely that justice in the US seems to be serving (music) industry in stead of striking a balance.

RIAA Agent   October 6th, 2007 - 5:03 am

God Bless the RIAA! I hope they find a way to catch all you freeloading downloaders–and make you pay for illegal filesharing. This kind of KAZAA-stranglehold tactic is taking precious money out of the pockets of the RIAA; money that could be better spent on mansions and more investments for the recording artists. Tsk, Tsk…

RIAA Agent   October 6th, 2007 - 5:06 am

…oh, and Bert from Holland. We, the RIAA, will find a way to get to your little country as well, so don’t think you are safe from our reach. No one beats the RIAA! BTW, Radiohead will eventually return to us begging and pleading to be represented by our trial lawyer-pitt bulls when they realize that the real money is in the pockets of the RIAA. Haha, what a joke. Just like the US Government, no one can beat the RIAA, no one (just ask Billy Gates how successful he was in fighting off the US Gov’t.)

Brad   October 29th, 2007 - 11:27 am

Im sure your not an RIAA agent.

Brad   October 29th, 2007 - 11:30 am

you are gay

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.