Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Minnesota woman to appeal $220,000 RIAA award
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Jammie Thomas, the Minnesota woman who last week was ordered to pay the
> | recording industry $222,000 for copyright violations related to sharing
> | songs, has decided to appeal the verdict.
> `----
>
> http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9792759-7.html
Unless the RIAA can prove they are not living off immoral earnings,
I think RIAA could and should get prosecuted.
The companies that sponsor the RIAA all have recording artists
that are hooked on drugs and their work is the product of their
drug taking habbits. Like athletes, runners and cyclists in the sporting
industry, drug taking enhanced the drug taking artists' abilities
and the products of those artists is what the members of RIAA peddle.
In other words, the members of the RIAA that fund the RIAA do so
on the back of immoral earnings.
A judge has to weigh the morality of passing down
fines to this woman on the basis that she has done something
immoral when all of the fines that is going to be gathered
will all be passed to an organisation that is itself immorally funded.
If a counterfitter manufactured some money through illegally
printing and it got stolen, and he then prosecuted
the thief with a big fine, there
is sufficient immorality in this case to make you think
and not proceed with a prosecution in the first place.
|
|
