Woman to pay downloading award herself

[Mackin]

By JOSHUA FREED, AP Business Writer

MINNEAPOLIS - Jammie Thomas makes $36,000 a year but says she's not looking for a handout to pay a $222,000 judgment after a jury decided she illegally shared music online and did it on purpose.
 
"I'm not going to ask for financial help," she told The Associated Press on Friday. But she added, "If it comes, I'm not going to turn it down, either."

Record labels have sued more than 26,000 people they accuse of sharing music online in violation of copyright laws.

Thomas was the first person to fight back all the way to a trial. Six major record companies accused Thomas of offering 1,702 songs on the Kazaa file-sharing network. The trial focused on 24 songs. On Thursday, jurors decided Thomas willfully violated the copyright on all 24 and recommended she pay damages of $9,250 per song, or $222,000.

Thomas has denied that the Kazaa account was hers.

She said people have been leaving messages on her MySpace page offering to help.

"I guess it's my Native pride," said Thomas, who is a member of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe. "Up until this point I have not held my hand out and asked for financial assistance from anyone."

Thomas, 30, works for the Mille Lacs band coordinating a federal grant for cleaning up contaminated land. She said she doesn't have the means to pay.

"I am a single mother of two boys. I make $36,000 a year at my job," she said. "At best they could try and get a court order garnishing my wages."

Her attorney, Brian Toder, said that copyright law automatically awards court costs and attorney fees to the winning party. Paying those too could push the total judgment against Thomas as high as a half-million dollars.

The lawsuits were brought by individual record companies and coordinated by the Recording Industry Association of America, where spokeswoman Cara Duckworth declined to comment on the group's plans for enforcing the judgment.

Thomas questioned whether the record companies will be able to enforce the verdict because she is an enrolled member of the Mille Lacs band, lives on its land and works for the band.

But Kevin Washburn, who teaches American Indian Law as a visiting associate professor at Harvard Law School, said tribal courts generally enforce judgments from other courts. And since this is a federal verdict, the tribal courts might not even have a say in enforcing the verdict.

"One way or another she's got to pay," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071005/ap_en_mu/downloading_music;_ylt=At3w_P3vhD3HqXC8Dzo96ZRxFb8C

 

[NobodyButMe]

don't these people have better shit to do than try to chase down 'illegal' music downloaders?

[Hey Ma]

that is a crime in itself that they are sticking a mother of two with that debt just for trying listen to music

[swangin and bangin]

fuckin illigal music downloaders 

[Low Key]

The Mille Lacs band of Ojibwe is fuckin' balling. They all get a piece of the pie from a very popular casino they have on their land. I don't know what she is talking about only making $36,000 a year. Most of them make that much in a month.

But back on topic, I am very glad I stopped using Kazaa, Limewire, all that bullshit because this hit a little too close to home. I have roughly 19,000 more songs on my comp than she does. Fuck the RIAA. Like their bitch asses need anymore money. And seriously, I wonder after these lawsuits if they even give the money to the artists who made the songs or just keep it for themselves.

[Vinnie]

By JOSHUA FREED, AP Business Writer

MINNEAPOLIS - Jammie Thomas makes $36,000 a year but says she's not looking for a handout to pay a $222,000 judgment after a jury decided she illegally shared music online and did it on purpose.
...
Her attorney, Brian Toder, said that copyright law automatically awards court costs and attorney fees to the winning party. Paying those too could push the total judgment against Thomas as high as a half-million dollars.

500,000 total judgment - 222,000 penalty judgment = 278,000 in lawyers' fees.
Yeah, that is practical.