RIAA Forced To Prove Their Claims To A Jury

[GhostShip]

For the first time in 4 years folks the RIAA are having to endure a jury trail after trying desperately to have the case derailed following the collapse of its usual extortion routine.

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/09/first-riaa-jury-trial-to-start-monday.html

The RIAA's motion for "summary adjudication" was denied last week, and the jury trial in Virgin v. Thomas is now scheduled to begin Tuesday, October 2nd, at 9:00 AM, before Hon. Michael Davis, at the federal courthouse in Duluth, Minnesota:

417 Federal Building
515 W. 1st Street
Duluth, Minnesota

Proceedings are open to the public.

This is a case in which the RIAA has no evidence that the defendant, Ms. Jammie Thomas, committed any copyright infringement. The RIAA has claimed that it will call Dr. Doug Jacobson and Cary Sherman as witnesses, as well as employees of the various record companies and of SafeNet/MediaSentry.

Ms. Thomas is represented by Brian Toder of Chestnut & Cambronne, located in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
The RIAA is represented by Richard Gabriel and Timothy Reynolds of Holmes Roberts & Owen, located in Denver, Colorado.

This is believed to be the first jury trial since the RIAA began its litigation campaign more than 4 years ago.

Its clearly got the RIAA worried as they have had to bring in their top gun, Richard Gabriel, his fees alone dwarf any expected setlement the alleged file sharer could be forced to pay if judgement went that way, in this case its going to require an act of god to prove their filesharing claim, lets hope justice prevails and if anyone lives near the courthouse feel free to pay a visit, there is an air of the carnival around this case.

[Trestor]

Yay! More power to her!

[Cobra]

I'm confused. Is this the same case that you posted a news report on about a month ago? If not, I thought THAT was the first case that was going to go to trial. I'm out of the loop again.

If they are bringing in experts but have no direct evidence, they will most likely try to discredit the individual by discrediting the whole and including the individual within the whole:

Exhibit A) People illegally share copyrighted files over P2P networks.
Exhibit B) Illegal sharing should be punished.
Exhibit C) Ms. Thomas is a person.

Therefore it can be concluded that Ms. Thomas should be punished becase people illegally share files and she is a person.


I hope they steam the trial over the Net!

[GhostShip]

Fresh news on this case folks.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071003-defendants-counsel-hammers-away-at-piracy-picture-painted-by-riaa.html

During the second morning of the Capitol v. Thomas trial, a clearer view of the two sides' legal strategy emerged. The RIAA, led by their counsel Richard Gabriel, is attempting to craft a carefully-constructed picture of the defendant as a KaZaA user whose "copying and distributing" music over the P2P network has harmed the record industry. The RIAA's counsel also hopes to paint a picture of the defendant as a habitual music thief who not only shares music, but also steals plenty of it herself. To that end, the RIAA is arguing that the music found on her computer during a forensic inspection was obtained illegally, by copying the music directly from another hard drive. In other words, she's guilty coming and going.

In contrast, the defendant's counsel, Brian Toder, has tried to plant the seeds of doubt about the real identity of the person detected using KaZaA by Media Sentry on the night of February 21, 2005. How can anyone be certain she was sharing the files? During the morning's session, he also attacked the RIAA's expert witness, Iowa State University computer science professor Doug Jacobson. 

To get the full picture please read the full article 

It seems Cary tried to get into the picture too to sway the jury but the judge told his where to go.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071003-judge-bars-riaa-president-from-testifying-in-capitol-records-v-thomas.html

After a brief recess this afternoon, plaintiffs' counsel Richard Gabriel and defendant's counsel Brian Toder made their cases before the judge as to the relevance of Sherman's testimony. Toder argued that Sherman's testimony was not relevant to the question at hand, the fact of whether Thomas was liable for copyright infringement. Gabriel said that Sherman would be able to tell the jury why this case was significant and, more importantly, describe the harm the RIAA believes piracy has caused to the music industry. 

"I don't want to turn this case into a soap box for the recording industry," Toder argued in response.

Lets see what tomorrow brings as its been made rather clear this whole case is just a collection of possible activities and no actual proof of any, of course being a non crominal case its sometimes the case that hearsay and innuendo can win the day so the jury will have to be on their toes when it comes to deciding first what the key points of the case are and how they frame up with the legal issues claimed.

[White Stripes]

damn....

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071004-verdict-is-in.html

... After just four hours of deliberation and two days of testimony, a jury found that Jammie Thomas was liable for infringing the record labels' copyrights on all 24 the 24 recordings at issue in the case of Capitol Records v. Jammie Thomas. The jury awarded $9,250 in statutory damages per song, after finding that the infringement was "willful," out of a possible total of $150,000 per song. The grand total? $222,000 in damages. ...

[SDL365]

damn....

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071004-verdict-is-in.html

... After just four hours of deliberation and two days of testimony, a jury found that Jammie Thomas was liable for infringing the record labels' copyrights on all 24 the 24 recordings at issue in the case of Capitol Records v. Jammie Thomas. The jury awarded $9,250 in statutory damages per song, after finding that the infringement was "willful," out of a possible total of $150,000 per song. The grand total? $222,000 in damages. ...

I'd love to know what  REALLY happened in that jury room.

What'll happen next? that ambulance-chaser Gabriel going after people for singing along in their car?

[GhostShip]

There does seem many ambiguities in this case even down to the fact that the woman had none of the claimed files on her machine when it was checked, something the already discredited kazaa "expert" had to admit along with many other points expressing doubt over the RIAA claims.

What seems to be the main reason for her losing this case is that the jury where told by the judge that merely having a shared file with music in it was a technical breach of the law, many do not agree with this interpretation as it flies in the face of logic that you can claim a breach of your right to make copies (copyright) when no copy in fact took place.

Of further note it seems the kazaa account used had the same name as the lady used on some of her email accounts as well as her having set up a password to her XP log-on, so you can see why it could be thought she was the correct user, in reality it may well be someone used kazaa but as to whom and who was behind the monitor at that time we shall never know.

I suspect then that there is some benefit to file sharers who trade potentially copyright files to regularly change the location of their shared files along with the content and never use an email name on a p2p system, of course many folks regularly format their drives to ensure they work at tip top condition after saving their files to disk and no doubt this helps muddy the waters too, when it comes down to it I'm certain most global file sharers will just take what they feel is the best course of action for them and plow on regardless of US law as in reality their governments have not been purchased by large media corporations.

[bughunter]

should we really be surprised at the incompetance of the american judicial system........after all a pedofile by the name of michael jackson got off due to fame and the size of his cheque book, and of course there is the farcical oj simpson trial a blantant murder who got off due to once again fame and a large cheque book.........
now we see blantant evidence of a judical system in the pocket of the cartel, and a judge who clearly doesnt even understand copywrite law, who clearly misdirected the jury lol, she should appeal on that alone, not to mention the cartel didnt even prove it was the defendant, as the cartel stated they dont have to prove anything,the fact files were on the hard drive is in its self guilt.
quote from the cartel scumbags.....
Gabriel then ran through the record labels' evidence, "The real issue in this case is whether the defendant violated the record companies' exclusive rights," he said. "We don't have to prove who got the file from the defendant.
note the we dont have to prove who got the file.............well like duh what about the burden of proof........innocent until proven guilty...........all out the door simply because the cartel point the finger and say she did it, we dont have to prove anything, because we the cartel say so and our word is good enough..................plus our cheque book says so..........
well im glad i live in a country where the cartel have no power, our privacy laws prevent the cartel from spying snooping or doing anything, and this case wouldnt even make it too court it would be thrown out as a joke..................
goes back to downloading copywrite material simply because i can and you cartel scumbags cant do a thing about it.....\/..

[SDL365]

Scumbags:

http://www.hro.com/people/bio?id=70

http://www.hro.com/people/bio?id=153

[GhostShip]

Cheers SDL , these two jokers can join my rogues gallery in the Lyte section   :twisted:

[SDL365]

just

Cheers SDL , these two jokers can join my rogues gallery in the Lyte section   :twisted:

Just doing a public service