RIAA rejects judge and takes Whitney to jury trial

September 22, 2008 by Mark O'Neill | 6 comments

By Mark O’Neill
Contributing Writer, [GAS]

Remember Whitney Harper?   She was that 16 year old who didn’t know that downloading MP3’s from Kazaa was illegal and she pleaded ignorance when the RIAA set their hound dogs on her.  It actually worked because the judge ordered that she only had to pay $200 per song instead of $750.

Well the RIAA has now apparently decided that the judge’s award of $200 per song is totally unacceptable and they have told the judge to shove his $7,400 up where the sun don’t shine.   Instead they have decided to force the whole matter to a federal jury trial and let the jury decide how much the RIAA deserves (I’m praying they award them $1!  That would be poetic justice!).

This decision just shows the RIAA’s hypocrisy.   All along they have said that it’s not about the money, that instead it’s about teaching those darn downloaders a lesson.   If that’s really the case, then why not just take the $7,400?   I don’t think Whitney will be doing any more downloading anytime soon.    But to drag her now through a jury trial and rack up even more legal costs?

That is just downright vindictiveness, nothing more, nothing less.    Why don’t they just form the firing squad, put her against the wall and get the whole thing over with?

Via Ars Technica

Sharing is Sexy!
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • FriendFeed
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
Related Posts:
  1. Jury consultants checking out potential jurors online
  2. $222,000 filesharing fine leaps to $1.92 million in new trial
  3. Is ignorance a valid legal defense for file-sharing?
  4. RIAA Gobbles settlement fines, kills infants
Cool posts on other blogs:
Did you enjoy this post? If so, subscribe to the geeksaresexy RSS feed.

6 Responses to “RIAA rejects judge and takes Whitney to jury trial”

  1. Steven says:

    Unfortunately for her the RIAA is trying to achieve 2 things with this trial – to make a definite example of her so that others will think twice before ‘downloading illegal music’ and to set a legal precedent for all following lawsuits they initiate.

  2. Sampi says:

    This is a ridiculously exaggerated measure. I hope the RIAA gets nothing from that poor girl.

  3. idiots says:

    If you dont wanna get sued just buy you fucking music
    instead of pirating it.

    Or use a proxy server so u dont get caught. Yes i know they can just ask them for the ips well then try using the program called ”Mute”

  4. John L says:

    For me the only thing the RIAA has achieved is that I will never buy any music again and have not since these scumbags got involved. They have achieved nothing for the people they are meant to represent, they lie at every opportunity and they try and destroy anybody they can guilty or not.
    My friends are of the same opinion and now refuse to purchase music. We all share now and the artists are the victims. As there has been very little in music that has come out for the last few years that has been worth paying for it has not been a problem for me. My kids do not buy music as it is too expensive and they are not as hooked on it as when I was younger. They all share as well.

  5. Timmy says:

    I remember when my mommy told me it’s good to share.
    Was my mommy lying?

  6. Angus says:

    @idiots

    Try reading the article. She didn’t know. She plead ignorance for a reason. Idiot.

Leave a Reply


| [Geeks are Sexy] Privacy Policy | Legal Disclaimer |