Thomas' Testimony and the RIAA's Near-Fatal Error
eldavojohn writes "The long and torrid trial of Jammie Thomas is in its second stage and in full swing. Yesterday, two major events took place: Thomas gave her surprising testimony and the RIAA was threatened for not disclosing new information to the opposing counsel. Thomas claimed she didn't know what KaZaA was before the trial started. She also admitted that the hard drive handed over to investigators was different than the one that was in her computer during the time of infringement. Her testimony from the first trial was that 'the hard drive replacement had taken place in 2004 and that the drive had not been swapped again since.' This is problematic because the new hard drive had a manufacturing date of 2005. The RIAA had its own troubles, almost losing all evidence from a particular witness when they added an additional log file to evidence without the defense being notified of it. The judge mercifully only removed that new evidence from the trial. It was related to whether or not an external hard drive was ever connected to the computer."
Where we don't care about anything important like the global economic meltdown or Iran's fraudulent elections or militants in Pakistan or North Korea going insane.
Nope, all we care about is being able to unabashedly steal music and then yell at the people selling it when they try to protect their interests.
Way to rage against the machine, assholes! How about you try fighting for something truly meaningful instead?
On the other hand, if they requested a search of her car (for instance), that would probably get tossed because it's unlikely to be relevant.
What if they requested her salad? Would that get tossed as well?
Come on mods- that was funny.