Slashdot Mirror
First RIAA Case Victim Finally Speaks Out
An anonymous reader writes with a link to an article at P2P Net about the very first victim of the RIAA's file-sharing litigation sweep. The site gave Jammie Thomas the chance to explain in her own words what the last two years have been like. She recounts her experiances with subpoenas, Best Buy, and most of all, stress. Even after all this time, her case is still in legal limbo: "As for what's next, my attorney filed a motion to have the verdict thrown out or to have the judgment reduced based on the constitutionality of the judgment. This is not an appeal, this is a post trial motion. We are currently waiting for the plaintiffs to file their response to our motion. The judge will not make a decision on that motion until after the plaintiffs have filed. The timeline for appeals is we have 30 days after the judge decides all post trial motions before we file any appeals ... I do know personally I cannot allow my case to end this way, with this judgment. My case will be used as a sledgehammer by the RIAA to force other people caught in the RIAA's driftnets to settle, even if they are or are not guilty of illegally sharing music online."
So kind of like when you steal a candy bar from a store and the only punishment is to pay back the 55 cents for the candy bar?
Oh wait, that's not how it works...
The way I see it is she paid $2,000 for the activity and she paid $220,000 as a penalty for trying to run and hide under the cloak of the anti-RIAA movement to get herself out of a jam
The very first thing I noticed when I saw the article was that this was a black woman in Minnesota. We're not talking Mississipi, but I have to imagine the possibility that race played a role, given what I know about Minnesota.
The second thing is that she was poor enough not to be able to afford her expert witness. I don't know about the jury, but the lack of defensive expert testimony is pretty glaring to me. The lack of contrary opinion to the RIAA's guy is very bad.
The third thing is that she seemed to see the case very simply. "It might have been my IP address, and my commonly used username, but how do you make the leap of logic that it was me on my computer?" From a criminal prosecution standpoint, that may be a valid defense - albeit a very thin one - but from a civil perspective, this isn't going to hold much water.
I personally had a very low opinion of the attorney and his preparation going into trial, but not having your expert witness and finding out about that at the last minute probably had a lot to do with it. How many of us would have volunteered had we known about that problem? How many of us would have sent money?
Regardless of guilt, this woman defended herself poorly and that is bad news for other victims. A beneficial ruling on appeal or on her post-trial motion would be great for everybody, but given the performance thus far I would expect the RIAA to win everything from this point forward.
The jury didn't decide if she was guilty of perjury, but they absolutely can take into account her attitude and demeanor. A defendant who doesn't show remorse always gets the iron fist while a defendant that does usually gets the soft glove. It's not that complicated.