Visit ShaunV's column >>

SHAUNV

I am not surprised that Dog reversed spells God!
Add To Watchlist
Articles Posted: 0; Links Seeded: 6392
Member Since: 2/2007

Labels Win Suit Against Song Sharer

advertisement

In a crucial legal victory for record labels and other copyright owners, a federal jury yesterday found a Minnesota woman liable for copyright infringement for sharing music online and imposed a penalty of $222,000 in damages.

Published to:

What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
4.9
{"commentId":1075522,"authorDomain":"SVForbes"}
Earlier, the judge in the case, Michael J. Davis of Federal District Court, ruled in the industry's favor on a hotly contested technical question, saying that for jurors to find her liable, the record labels did not have to prove that songs on Ms. Thomas's computer had actually been transmitted to others online. Rather, the act of making them available could be viewed as infringement, the judge ruled.
{"commentId":1075522,"threadId":"158195","contentId":"1004552","authorDomain":"SVForbes"}
  • 1 vote
Reply#1 - Fri Oct 5, 2007 10:01 AM EDT
{"commentId":1076151,"authorDomain":"sbutki"}

All this over only 24 songs?!

{"commentId":1076151,"threadId":"158195","contentId":"1004552","authorDomain":"sbutki"}
  • 1 vote
Reply#2 - Fri Oct 5, 2007 2:30 PM EDT
{"commentId":1076170,"authorDomain":"SVForbes"}

I know.

Perhaps they are trying to set an example.

{"commentId":1076170,"threadId":"158195","contentId":"1004552","authorDomain":"SVForbes"}
  • 2 votes
#2.1 - Fri Oct 5, 2007 2:35 PM EDT
{"commentId":1077342,"authorDomain":"sbutki"}

I think so. It just seemed so.. minor.

{"commentId":1077342,"threadId":"158195","contentId":"1004552","authorDomain":"sbutki"}
  • 1 vote
#2.2 - Fri Oct 5, 2007 11:48 PM EDT
{"commentId":1077776,"authorDomain":"SVForbes"}

Also, maybe she was an easier target for a win, than other cases.

{"commentId":1077776,"threadId":"158195","contentId":"1004552","authorDomain":"SVForbes"}
  • 1 vote
#2.3 - Sat Oct 6, 2007 9:19 AM EDT
Reply
{"canLink":false,"threadId":"158195","isPrivate":false}
Leave a Comment:
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
{"threadId":"158195","contentId":"1004552"}
Start TrackingStart Tracking
Stop TrackingStop Tracking