RIAA vs. Jammie Thomas, Round 2

Vowing not to get jammed up again, Jammie Thomas is seemingly ready for her new trial with the RIAA. with a new tact, and a new attorney; it does seem as though the other trial never took place, as all parties seem fresh as before the first foray into the courtroom.

This time Thomas will (so she says) prove these facts:

• That she “never used KaZaA at all”
• That every WMA song on her computer was ripped from her CD collection
• That she “did not download and share any of these songs”
• That her alleged file-sharing conduct—which, remember, she did not engage  in— “did not cause substantial harm to the RIAA and would not even if widespread”
• That any infringement she may have committed—with the KaZaA program that she did not use—is “fair use”

Though these claims, taken as a whole, do not pass the test of critical thinking, it will be interesting to see what the court does.

I did not follow the first trial, and so I really can’t comment on that outcome, but this trial must certainly do better than try to prove the above, as the jury will certainly laugh this out of court, as presented here.

From the case shown in the article containing the citing above, on Ars Technica. it appears that Thomas will be found guilty, which might be alright, but the amount of damages claimed by the RIAA had better be found ridiculously high, and thrown out.

Ars says it will be onsite when the trial starts, on June 15, so more from them will certainly be forthcoming – lots of mp3 downloaders will certainly be watching, too.

§

‘

•