Monthly Archives: June 2009


It’s often true that court reporting exaggerates sentences to make them sound ludicrous, and I have railed against that before. But this case a fortnight ago – held in a jurisdiction where juries get to award damages – is beyond ridiculous:

In a surprise decision, the jury imposed damages against Thomas-Rasset, who was originally accused of sharing more than 1,700 songs, at a whopping $80,000 for each of the 24 songs she was ultimately found guilty of illegally sharing.

I haven’t the words. What an affront to justice and common sense. $1.92 million for 24 songs? What was that based on – the amount the RIAA executives rip-off from artists and consumers each day?

Still, you’ve got to admire the work of the RIAA’s lawyers. You know, the sheer skill they must have employed – regardless of what it was used for. What unmitigated but spectacular bullshit they must have sold that jury. They may have been working for evil, but they clearly did it really, really well.