RIAA open to non-monetary options to settle high-profile file sharing case

By on July 11, 2013, 6:00 PM

Seven years is a long time to fight a battle in court but if your name is Jammie Thomas-Rasset, that’s the reality you’ve faced for close to a decade. Thomas-Rasset was accused of illegally sharing 24 songs online back in 2006 and faced a fine of $3,500.

The Minnesota woman decided to fight the charges and after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear her case this past March, she was left owing the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) $222,000. Whoops.

There could still be a happy ending after all as the RIAA has offered multiple ways to settle the case for less than the amount owed. Thomas-Rasset’s attorney, Michael Wilson, said the RIAA offered her the opportunity to make a public statement in opposition of file sharing in exchange for a reduced fine.

Alternately, Thomas-Rasset could settle the case in exchange for a contribution to a local music charity. The RIAA said they would even consider a variety of non-monetary settlement options that would be up to her to offer. Her lawyer noted that she was “pretty opposed” to the idea of making a public service announcement and was planning to look into the option of filing for bankruptcy protection instead.

Maybe I’m alone in my thinking, but after seven years and who knows how much money already invested in her defense, maybe it’s time to simply swallow your pride and accept a non-monetary settlement option. What says you?




User Comments: 21

Got something to say? Post a comment
1 person liked this | cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

7 years for what? 7 years is BS!

The courts don't care about justice or it wouldn't take so long for them to process.

If a trial can not be completed within 6 months, it should be dismissed.

Guest said:

Knowingly downloaded copyright material? get caught? pay up... simple..

TomSEA TomSEA, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

If you read the article cliffordcooley, it's 7 years because she has dragged it on that long. She's been provided multiple offers and opportunities to resolve the case but refuses to do so.

There are some people who just can't slam their head into a wall often or long enough. Looks like this lady is one of those.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

If you read the article cliffordcooley, it's 7 years because she has dragged it on that long.
I did read, and it was allowed. My comment stands!

treetops treetops said:

222k is to much for us peons

1 person liked this | Guest said:

I think it is ridiculous that idiotic corporations with money can throw their weight around and ask for such stupid fines to even be considered. This IMO is like sentencing someone to death. Of course you have to file for bankruptcy. Or kill yourself. Your two choices here. Or leave your country run by morons? I would leave. Flip them the bird get on the plane and just go.

Seriously its not murder. Its a song. Figure out how to protect yourself in this digital age instead of going after poor people who can't pay your silly figures. Want your cash, Kim Dotcom has it.

howzz1854 said:

The same could be said about after 7 long years of process, you would be throwing all that away if you just give in now. in 2008 when stock market tanked, the worst thing you could do in the aftermath of that crash was to sell your investments. there is no turning back, you're already fucked, or what texans would call it, "all in". I think I am with her on this one. maybe there's a half way point in between where she still wasn't in too deep, and could settle out of court. but when you go all in, you've got nothing to loose.

Ranger1st Ranger1st said:

Interesting number $222K I wonder if it's total net worth ? I can see the RIAA doing that, I also wonder if working for the RIAA in a peon capacity is something akin to people who bought a Ace of Bass CD..( there were people out there who did.. but no one in their right mind will ever admit to it.. ), personally I'd love to meet an RIAA employee one night, out of the town in the big city.. it would be a toss up between getting all the dirty secrets out of them, or simply dwarf tossing them with a few close friends for a few hr's down an embankment.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

people who bought a Ace of Bass CD..( there were people out there who did.. but no one in their right mind will ever admit to it.. )
I'm not in my right mind because here I am admitting to buying the CD. Damn it has been so long ago, what the hell difference does it make whether we own up to it or not. There has been people own up to breaking the law, whats so bad about buying a blasted CD.

1 person liked this | howzz1854 said:

Interesting number $222K I wonder if it's total net worth ? I can see the RIAA doing that, I also wonder if working for the RIAA in a peon capacity is something akin to people who bought a Ace of Bass CD..( there were people out there who did.. but no one in their right mind will ever admit to it.. ), personally I'd love to meet an RIAA employee one night, out of the town in the big city.. it would be a toss up between getting all the dirty secrets out of them, or simply dwarf tossing them with a few close friends for a few hr's down an embankment.

Ace of Base was the shizzle in the 90's. I don't care how you diss it. but in the 90's it was the shit, and almost everyone loved it. it was more popular across the globe than lady gaga ever is today. I had multiple albums of their music. I still bust out the mp3 once in a while now just to recall the good old days. would it be popular today? no. the same can be said about any popular music fast forward 15~20 years. your kids would be making fun of what you listen to now. "my hump, my hump my hump my hump... my lovely hump...!"

1 person liked this | umbala said:

The bottom line is this; the RIAA have already ruined this woman's life and now they want to make a very public example out of her by trying to force her to admit guilt. Whether she's guilty or not (she probably was) is irrelevant at this point. The damage to her life has been done. Seven years of legal aid probably cost her far more than the $222,000 the RIAA has won and she's probably on the brink of bankruptcy either way. Admitting guilt at this point would simply add insult to injury and I would refuse too if I was in her position.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Whether she's guilty or not (she probably was) is irrelevant at this point.
Precisely!

Ranger1st Ranger1st said:

Thats.. just sad.. no one loved it.. no one. It was epic drivel. They made the Spice girls look top shelf! ( unless your some banana hammock euro trash ), then it all makes sense.

Ace of Base was the shizzle in the 90's. I don't care how you diss it. but in the 90's it was the ****, and almost everyone loved it. it was more popular across the globe than lady gaga ever is today. I had multiple albums of their music. I still bust out the mp3 once in a while now just to recall the good old days. would it be popular today? no. the same can be said about any popular music fast forward 15~20 years. your kids would be making fun of what you listen to now. "my hump, my hump my hump my hump... my lovely hump...!"

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Thats.. just sad.. no one loved it.. no one. It was epic drivel. They made the Spice girls look top shelf! ( unless your some banana hammock euro trash ), then it all makes sense.
Whats sad is the fact you don't think people have different taste in music than you do. I could probably say the same about music you listen to, but that doesn't mean I will.

Ranger1st Ranger1st said:

See, I don't actually ahve a taste in music, couldn't care one way or the other.. but I can sure as hell tell a over processed group in a box, from the real thing there trek nerd.

Whats sad is the fact you don't think people have different taste in music than you do. I could probably say the same about music you listen to, but that doesn't mean I will.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

See, I don't actually ahve a taste in music

Yes you do or you wouldn't be posting negatively against anyone.

trek nerd

WOW, I can't believe you meant that as an insult, when I have a com badge in my avatar. You promoted my avatar when you obviously noticed. Thank you!! You are lucky I didn't take offense, that would have made it against TechSpot regulations.

tipstir tipstir, TS Ambassador, said:

In any case they made her example not to steal and make it your own and then share it. She should have paid the first fine and now it's hundreds of thousands. She's lucky they didn't make her pay millions or higher. So this sends a message out into the cyber world don't share media to anyone if you don't have the copyrights of ownership or permission of the author..

Ranger1st Ranger1st said:

Complete BS, it's not going to make a single person who pirates anything, change a single thing. All they've done is ruin 1 person's life and allow sanctimonious window lickers to berate her because they didn't get caught themselves..

Guest said:

If the RIAA feels this is appropriate for this violation where do they stop. They have bought Washington D.C. and the Justice Department and have no one to answer to. Resistance is futile. If you oppose them they will send you to the poorhouse or indentured slavery as their mouthpiece. It is outrageous actions like these that cause people to rebel and resist. $200 should exceed any damages. $222,000 is just exploiting and raping the public. People should turn the system back on them. I am offended by Beiber and have been assaulted by his crap called music. I demand my $500,000 per violation. Pay up bitches.

fimbles fimbles said:

I bet that 222.000k does not even cover the first 12 months of the riaa legal costs.

Shamefull waste of time and money.

tipstir tipstir, TS Ambassador, said:

Hey we can sue for anything here in the USA, so RIAA and it's lobby can pretty much govern they ways. The average person can't do the same. She had files on her system and she shared out and she got caught by the system. She then tried to fight it and well she has to pay more fines.

It's the system we have to live by here that's the way it works. Unless laws are changed in favor for the people by the people which is was setup once. But favors and under the table deals have change the rules to their favor those who have power and profits.

Lucky it wasn't the MPAA just a messy process.

Music industry is huge and they have lawyers who have to be paid so that $222,000 should cover all those legal fees an etc.

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.