These are the 24 songs that cost Jammie Thomas $220,000

A federal jury ordered a Minnesota woman to pay record labels $220,000 for illegally distributing 24 songs over the Kazaa network. Take a look at the songs, then ask yourself, what's the real offense here?

-Vanessa Williams "Save the Best for Last"
-Reba McEntire "One Honest Heart"
-Janet Jackson "Let's Wait Awhile"
-Goo Goo Dolls "Iris"
-Journey "Faithfully" and "Don't Stop Believing"
-Sara McLachlan "Possession" and "Building a Mystery"
-Aerosmith "Cryin' "
-No Doubt "Bathwater," "Hella Good" and "Different People"
-Linkin Park "One Step Closer"
-Guns N Roses "Welcome to the Jungle" and "November Rain"
-Def Leppard "Pour Some Sugar on Me"
-Bryan Adams "Somebody"
-Sheryl Crow "Run Baby Run"
-Richard Marx "Now and Forever"
-Destiny's Child "Bills, Bills, Bills"
-Green Day "Basket Case"
-Gloria Estefan "Here We Are," "Coming Out of the Heart," and "Rhythm is Gonna Get You."

She must have been the one to originate those songs. She had like 1000 other songs too.

Did the RIAA ever prove that anyone downloaded those songs from her? Seems to me that just having the songs in a directory open to the 'net is only creating the opportunity for others to violate copyright. She would only violate copyright if she downloaded songs from someone else. Right?

If I leave a book next to a photocopy machine, am I guilty of copyright infringement? I think I'm only guilty if I actually copy the book, and there are still provisions about what entails 'fair use' etc.

bsimon,

I'll refer you to Jury Instructions #14 and #15:

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 14: The act of downloading copyrighted sound recordings on a peer-to-peer network, without license from the copyright owners, violates the copyright owners' exclusive reproduction right.

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 15: The act of making copyrighted sound recordings available for electronic distribution on a peer-to-peer network, without license from the copyright owners, violates the copyright owners' exclusive right of distribution, regardless of whether actual distribution has been shown.

So, according to the instructions given the jury, the record labels did not have to prove anyone downloaded the songs from her. That's the way it looks to me anyway.

I'm just completely dumbfounded.

This is like a jury deciding a kid convicted of shoplifting a Twix bar from SA should pay SA $10,000 in damages.

It turns out she would have been better off actually shoplifting the CDs in hindsight:

http://mnteractive.com/archive/quick-guide-to-crime-in-minnesota/