Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:"the Native American Minnesotan" (Score 1) 146

by NewYorkCountryLawyer (#42274911) Attached to: Jammie Thomas Takes Constitutional Argument To SCOTUS

Why do we care that she's of tribal descent? Are we now saying tribal American's are exempt from copyright laws? I flatly refuse to redefine native they way the PC crowd does, if you were born in the US you are native. I happen to be of Cherokee linage as well, but that doesn't matter, I'm native because I was born here.

In this case, I personally believe that she was discriminated against by the jury, because she was a Native American. She was tried many many miles from where she lived and worked, and did not have a jury of her peers.

Comment Re:Question for NYCountryLawyer re illegal downloa (Score 2) 146

by NewYorkCountryLawyer (#42274829) Attached to: Jammie Thomas Takes Constitutional Argument To SCOTUS

Was she really convicted of "illegal downloading?"

1. She wasn't "convicted" of anything; this wasn't a criminal case. She was found liable for copyright infringement by making copies through downloading, thus violating the record companies' exclusive reproduction rights.
2. She was also sued for "distributing" and "making available for distributing", but the judge threw out the "making available for distributing" claim, and there was no evidence offered of the "distributing" claim.

So yes, the only thing she was found liable for was downloading.

Comment Re:by my estimation (Score 1) 146

by NewYorkCountryLawyer (#42274729) Attached to: Jammie Thomas Takes Constitutional Argument To SCOTUS

This case is Capitol vs Thomas, not RIAA vs Thomas. Capitol is a music publisher, and this case was about their works.

1. Capitol is but one of the plaintiffs.
2. The RIAA was in fact running the case, with the aid of the record company plaintiffs.
3. Capitol is a record company, not a music publisher.
4. The case was about the recordings of several different companies.

Submission + - Jammie Thomas takes constitutional argument to SCOTUS (blogspot.com)

Submitted by
NewYorkCountryLawyer
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: "Jammie Thomas-Rasset, the Native American Minnesotan found by a jury to have downloaded 24 mp3 files of RIAA singles, has filed a petition for certioriari to the United States Supreme Court, arguing that the award of $220,000 in statutory damages is excessive, in violation of the Due Process Clause. Her petition (PDF) argued that the RIAA's litigation campaign was "extortion, not law", and pointed out that "[a]rbitrary statutory damages made the RIAA’s litigation campaign possible; in turn,that campaign has inspired copycats like the so-called Copyright Enforcement Group; the U.S. Copyright Group, which has already sued more than 20,000 individual movie downloaders; and Righthaven, which sued bloggers. This Court should grant certiorari to review this use of the federal courts as a scourge"."
Cellphones

Papa John's Sued For Unwanted Pizza-Related Texts 418

Posted by samzenpus from the spam-spam-spam-pizza-spam dept.
jfruh writes "Nationwide pizza chain Papa John's is finding itself on the receiving end of a $250 million text spam lawsuit. From the article: 'Seattle law firm Heyrich Kalish McGuigan, representing three Papa John's customers, alleged that the pizza delivery service has sent 500,000 unwanted text messages to customers. If the court finds that Papa John's violated the U.S. Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the pizza maker could have to pay damages of $500 per text message, or US$250 million, one of the largest damage awards under the 1991 law, the law firm said. "Many customers complained to Papa John's that they wanted the text messages to stop, and yet thousands of spam text messages were sent week after week," Donald Heyrich, attorney for the plaintiffs said in a statement. "This should be a wake-up call to advertisers. Consumers do not want spam on their cell phones."'
Earth

Artificial Misting System Allows Reintroduction of Extinct Toad 121

Posted by samzenpus from the spritzing-back-to-life dept.
terrancem writes "The Kihansi Spray Toad went extinct in the wild in 2005 when its habitat in Tanzania was destroyed by a dam. However conservationists at the Bronx Zoo managed to maintain a captive population which is now large enough to allow a bold experiment to move forward: reintroducing the toad into its old habitat. To make the once tropical gorge moist again, engineers have designed an artificial misting system that should allow toads to survive in the wild. The effort marks what may be the first time conservationists have ever re-established an 'extinct' species in a human-engineered ecosystem."
Television

BBC Turns Off CEEFAX Service After 38 Years 160

Posted by Soulskill from the retiring-after-years-of-service dept.
Kittenman writes "After 38 years (1974 - 2012) the BBC's CEEFAX service has ceased transmission. The service gave on-line up-to-date textual information (albeit in condensed form) to TV viewers in the pre-Internet era and afterwards. Its final broadcast signed off with, 'Goodbye, cruel world.' '... the real impetus for viewers came when BBC Television decided to use a selection of Ceefax pages, accompanied by music, before the start of programming each day. Initially called Ceefax AM and Ceefax In Vision, the Pages From Ceefax "programme" continued for 30 years, being broadcast overnight on BBC Two until this week. As viewers got a small taste of what Ceefax had to offer, millions of Britons during the 1980s invested in new teletext-enabled TV sets which gave them access to the full Ceefax service, which by now included recipe details for dishes prepared on BBC cookery shows, share prices, music reviews and an annual advent calendar.' An British ex-PM (John Major) said, 'From breaking global news to domestic sports news, Ceefax was speedy, accurate and indispensable. It can be proud of its record.'"

Comment Re:Good Lord (Score 1) 285

by NewYorkCountryLawyer (#41319869) Attached to: 8th Circuit Upholds $220,000 Verdict In Jammie Thomas Case

Thomas did not ruin the life of any of the involved corporation(s), nor did she ruin the life of any of their employees. It is simply not just to ruin her life in retaliation. That this goes on and is so widely considered legitimate is an example of our remaining barbarism.

I think most people, both in and out of the United States, see a result like this as absurd.

Comment Re:Piracy = theft? (Score 1) 285

by NewYorkCountryLawyer (#41319841) Attached to: 8th Circuit Upholds $220,000 Verdict In Jammie Thomas Case

Nearly 10k per song is just dumb. If a CD is 12 tracks and costs ~15 bucks, its a bit over $1 per song. So this is a 1000000% penalty. one million percent. Just insane, no way that isnt unconstitutional. The fines should be like 200, maybe 300% penalty, maybe even 1000% (10x). That's reasonable. The punishment must fit the crime and all that.

That's the issue all right. And I think the Court's decision is absurd.

Submission + - 8th Circuit upholds $220,000 verdict in Jammie Thomas case (blogspot.com)

Submitted by
NewYorkCountryLawyer
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: "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-Rasset, ruling that the award of $220,000, or $9250 per song, was not an unconstitutional violation of Due Process. The Court, in its 18-page decision (PDF), declined to reach the "making available" issue, for procedural reasons."

Comment No distribution here (Score 1) 312

I noticed some pro-RIAA posts saying that defendant was liable for distributing, not just downloading. This is simply not so. Distribution, within the meaning of the Copyright Act, requires a sale or other transfer of ownership, or a rental, lease or lending.... none of which occurred here. 17 USC 106(3)

Slashdot Top Deals

The one day you'd sell your soul for something, souls are a glut.

Close