Copyright case ends

It appears that the hope that a new trial for Jammie Thomas-Rasset to lessen the fines for file sharing have been squashed. After the second trial, the jury fined Jammie Thomas-Rasset $1.92 million. Divide that among the 24 songs she shared and that is an astounding $80,000 a piece.

Unfortunately I have not had access to the trial or materials presented at the trial(s). However, there is already buzz that the fines are too harsh and a change in copyright law is needed. I am sure an appeal will be made in the near future. How does one, not wealthy already, come up with that sort of money?

Hopefully wiser minds will prevail and discover that the penalties prescribed by US copyright law are grossly out of proportion to the crime.

House Resolution 4137

The contents of HR 4137 are interesting. Specifically the following amendment; SEC. 494. CAMPUS-BASED DIGITAL THEFT PREVENTION. The amendment, my interpretation, stipulates that colleges and universities take on the role of intellectual property police. In short, the amendment requires that colleges/universities provide information on copyright and the illegal downloading of intellectual property. It also says that colleges/universties should develop a to provide alternatives to illegal downloading of intellectual property and peer-to-peer sharing of protected materials. Further, it specifies that colleges/universities should plan to explore a technology-based deterrent to illegal downloading.

An interesting point is that the resolution seems to treat colleges/universities as both Internet end users and Internet service providers. This resolution seems to present a deviation from earlier cases of illegal downloading of intellectual property. Not only can the college/university loose funding with non-compliance, but the college/university has to provide an alternative to the illegal downloading of intellectual property. This sounds like a gift to the recording industry. Make colleges/universities subscribe to some service in order to prevent illegal downloads of intellectual property? Why not simply allow the college/university to stop illegal downloading of intellectual property by technology-based tools? Who will pay for the alternative downolad system too? That would be you and I the students and taxpayers.

A secod point that needs to be discussed is how the colleges/universities will distinguish between downloads protected by fair use and illegal downloads of intellectual property?

There are more questions than solutions in the resolutions current form. Perhaps if it makes it way to becoming a bill, the resolution will evolve to answer or solve some of these points here?