$222,000, or $9250 per song …

The  champagne corks will be popping  over in RIAA Land.

The US Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit has upheld the initial jury verdict in the case against Jammie Thomas, Capitol Records v. Jammie Thomas-Rasse, says Ray Beckerman in Recording Industry versus The People.

It was the first jury trial for a file-sharing suit brought by Big Music, and focused on  the alleged copyright infringement  of 24 songs.

The Court of Appeals ruled the award of $220,000, or $9250 per song,  wasn’t an unconstitutional violation of Due Process.

In its 18-page decision (PDF), it declined to reach the ‘making available’ issue, for procedural reasons,’  says Beckerman.

So what exactly  were the songs  each  said to be wort a total of $1.92 million?

Here’s the play list »»»

UMG
Vanessa Williams – Save the best for last
Sheryl Crow – Run baby run
Reba McEntire – One honest heart
Janet Jackson – let’s wait awhile
Guns ‘n Roses – Welcome to the jungle
Guns ‘n Roses – November rain
Def Leppard – Pour some sugar on me
Bryan Adams – Somebody
Aerosmnith – Cryin

Warner Bros Records
Linkin Park – One step closer
Green Day – Basket case
Goo Goo Dolls – iris

Interscope Records
No Doubt – Hella Good
No Doubt – Different people
No Doubt – Bathwater

Arista Records
Sarah McLaughlan – Building a mystery
Sarah McLaughlan – Possession

Sony BMG Music Entertainment

Gloria Estefan – Rhythm is gonna get you
Gloria Estefan – Here and we are
Gloria Estefan – coming out of the dark
Journey – Faithfully
Journey – Don’t stop believin
Destiny’s child – Bills, bills, bills

Capitol Records
Richard Marx – Now and for ever

With their Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) as a front, sub-units of Vivendi Universal (France), Sony (Japan), EMI (Britain), and Warner Music (US) have already put Jammie and her family through hell, I wrote  in June, 2008, going on.

“First, they used the mainstream media to have her publicly tried, and found guilty, of the non-existent crime of illegal file sharing.

Then, she and her family had to endure another trial, this time before a judge and jury, at the end of which she was ordered to pay the corporate music industry almost a quarter of a million dollars in ‘damages’.

“But the only suggestion Jammie had ever downloaded, or shared music on discredited p2p file sharing application Kazaa, came from MediaSentry, an equally discredited company used by the RIAA (and later fired by the RIAA) to collect ‘evidence’.

and US judge James P. Jones wrote,  “Customers who download music and movies for free would not necessarily spend money to acquire the same product”.

“Soon after the case was over, however, judge Michael Davis, who’d heard it, declared a mistrial, admitting he`d committed a, manifest error of law by telling the jury the, “act of making copyrighted sound recordings available for electronic distribution on a peer-to-peer network, without licensefrom the copyright owners, violates the copyright owners` exclusive right of distribution, regardless of whether actual distribution has been shown.”

Helena, Jammie, and Tanya Andersen, and Patti Santangelo, and Rae-Jay Schwartz and Marie Lindor are only five of the people brutalised by RIAA lawyers in what are called courts of law.

But every single one of the  more than 40,000 people whoreceived RIAA subpoenas has sat back in shock, wondering how they can possibly take on a hugely wealthy Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music with their immense legal, financial and political resources?

The answer is: they can’t, and the people who run, and who work for, the RIAA such as it’s bosses, Mitch Bainwol and Cary Sherman, and Cara Duckworth and Jonathan Lamy, know it as they accuse their victims of stealing, when nothing’s been stolen, of being criminals, when no crime has been committed, of having caused misery to record industry workers, when the people behind the ‘trade’ association are wholly to blame.

Jammie is just one of the completely innocent, and very ordinary, men, women and children across America whose lives have been made almost unbearable by threats of law suits and fines they’d never be able to pay, I posted in 2008.

Now,  will the awards be equitably divided  among the artists  whose works were allegedly infringed?

Will they hell.

[Follow me on Twitter @jonnewton8, and/ or identi.ca]

Creative Commons License

 

Yes? No? Maybe -- maybe ;)