10.05.07
To hell with the little guy, it’s time to root for the big guy
Today we are celebrating a victory for the big guy. Of course, this may sound counterintuitive; after all, according to popular opinion aren’t we supposed to be rooting for the little guy while trying to take the big guy down?
Not if you ask me. I’m tired of the little guy sticking it to the big guy with blatant disregard for law or basic decency. And as such, I praise the jurors and Federal judge who found Jammie Thomas guilty of violating copyright laws for sharing music over the internet. This was a precedence-setting case that had a whole lot riding on it. Had Jammie won, it would have opened up the floodgates and turned the whole thing into a music sharing free-for-all. However, the victory by the recording companies sends a strong message to all of the people out there who thumb their noses at copyright law: Don’t screw with us.
I am both thrilled and embarrassed that this happened in my own back yard. I am thrilled because it gave us a close up look at a very important Federal case. However, I am embarrassed because she used some really lame excuses in her defense and came across looking like a complete moron. Apparently I wasn’t the only one, as the the jurors didn’t think to highly of her excuses either, hence the “guilty” verdict. After all, did she really think that anybody would buy the excuse that on the particular night that she was caught that “she was the victim of a hacker who successfully ’spoofed’ such identifying data to make it appear she was illegally sharing files?” Get real. The defense attorney ought to be slapped for trying to use that as his defense. After all, she was nailed by user name and IP address, which she admits were her own. Just not on that night.
But I digress. What is it about this that makes me so happy? I mean, shouldn’t I feel bad for the single mother of two who is now responsible for coughing up $222,000 to the record companies? Wasn’t she just the victim here?
No way.
The fact is, she broke the law. Like so many others out there who shrug off the law when they trade music and movies back and forth across the internet, she thumbed her nose at federal copyright law. It just so happens that she got nailed right to the wall for it. It could have been anybody, but it just so happened to be her. She can defend herself all she wants, but the fact remains that she was nailed sharing over 1700 songs and that is against the law; and I will always place the law above the supposed “rights” of the little guy.
Personally I am tired of all of the whining babies out there who claim that they have the right to break the law because art should be free. Art may be free, but producing, marketing and selling art is not. The only right people have when it comes to art is the right to enjoy it. To own it you must buy it, and perhaps that is where people are going so wrong these days. They lack the understanding of that distinction. They feel that it is their right to indiscrimiately own things that aren’t theirs. But then again, isn’t that the prevailing attitude out there right now anyway? People are claiming that they have the right to something for nothing. This extends from health care to music downloading. Is it only a matter of time before clothing starts disappearing off of shelves because people think they have the right to that too? But that’s neither here nor there and I’m getting off topic.
With this victory, the music industry now has the precedence of a federal court and federal jury to use as leverage against these people. They now have the ability to tell people that not only are they breaking the law, but the law WILL be upheld in court and they will be punished for violating it. Will this stop the millions of people out there who laugh in the face of the law? No, of course not, but it will stop some of them now that they know that they can be prosecuted for violating that little warning that they blew off when they decided to share copyrighted material.
As a staunch defender of capitalism, I am pleased that the big guy took down the little guy this time. The message needs to be sent out that people have no right to get something for nothing - not even art. This small victory in Duluth, Minnesota was not for monetary gain. It was simply symbolic and it stands as a reminder that we are not a communal society. The community does not have rights to something that one person has. If ten people want what one person has, the other nine must obey the law and purchase one as well. It’s not only the law, it’s capitalism at work, and I that must always be upheld if we want to call ourselves Americans.
GadgetGadget.info - Gadgets on the web » To hell with the little guy, it’s time to root for the big guy said,
October 5, 2007 at 9:26 am
[...] unknown wrote an interesting post today!.Here’s a quick excerptToday we are celebrating a victory for the big guy. Of course, this may sound counterintuitive; after all, according to popular opinion aren’t we supposed to be rooting for the little guy while trying to take the big guy down? … [...]
Brent Metzler said,
October 5, 2007 at 9:38 am
I don’t know who you are, but you are my new hero.
arclightzero said,
October 5, 2007 at 9:46 am
Hey, thanks!
mcdizzell said,
October 5, 2007 at 9:53 am
I agree with you in upholding the law, but dosen’t the “I’ll take what I see fit” mentality stem farther than modern day times. I am constantly hearing kids in school talk about manifest destiny and imperialism as a perfect example to give justice to their habits of disregarding the law. And I think thats the liberal teaching of today to blame, because another one of these examples of justice always makes the people think they’re patriotic when they stand up against the big guy when one of their fellow little guys is taken down. I think that this ‘example’ will only increase the amount of tranfering of copyrighted material illegally.
Jason said,
October 5, 2007 at 10:13 am
I am constantly hearing kids in school talk about manifest destiny and imperialism as a perfect example to give justice to their habits of disregarding the law.
Umm, really? Like, they go to the mall and shoplift all kinds of stuff, and then say, “Manifest destiny, man, manifest destiny” or “If the U.S. can invade Iraq, then I see no reason why I should have to pay for this Sony PSP”?
Are you a teacher? Or do you just hang around schools listening to kids talk (and if so, that’s kind of creepy)?
Methinks you may be exaggerating a bit here. Hell, I’d be surprised if most of today’s school kids even knew what “manifest destiny” even means.
arclightzero said,
October 5, 2007 at 10:46 am
That is an interesting perspective, although I don’t think that most kids know what on earth they are talking about. They may quote manifest destiny, but what is the likelihood that they could explain manifest destiny to you? I fear that these are the sorts of talking points that they pick up from the internet or from some underground magazine and they simply run with it.
You are right though, this is a historical issue and certailny nothing new. However, and this is the important aspect here, is that as a society we have grown and matured. We can’t look at history and say “this is what we did so we should be able to do it today.” We must learn and grow from history, not use it to justify our current actions.
As for if they will continue to stand up and be patriotic by standing up to the big guy? Let them. If they’re too dumb to realize that breaking the law isn’t patriotic, then let them go to court and pay the fines. Let them go to court and argue patriotism or manifest destiny. The judge and the jury would laugh at them while handing down the fines.
I think what really needs to be addressed is parents. Where are the parents? Why are they not telling their kids that there are right things and wrong things? I may have done some dumb things when I was young, but my parents would have garroted me if I would have thumbed my nose at the law and tried to justify it with some lame excuse like history or patriotism. These kids need to realize that their actions as minors can come back and destroy their parents if they get nailed by the law. I think that once a couple of parents really get hit hard, other parents will start cracking down on their kids. I would hate to see it come to that, but people don’t seem to listen unless they are under direct threat. That is bad parenting at its worst.
totaltransformation said,
October 5, 2007 at 10:55 am
That being said, I hope the recording industry shows some mercy and lowers the amount they expect her to pay. It would go a long way to improving their bad P.R.
micky2 said,
October 5, 2007 at 10:59 am
It’s all Nikes fault.
Just do it !
Actually its not their fault but I cant help but run that slogan through my head everytime time I see some idiot punk pishing his weight around or some insecure brat jumping of a bridge with an umbrella so he can put the video on you tube. Its become a society of
” I dare you !” And we’ll just worry about the consequences later.
Wanna know why ?
NO PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILTY is required for shit today that why !
Society has raised a shit load of kids that are allowed to do anything because the interpretation of any assinine behavior has been given a list of pathetic justifications ranging from race, PC bullshit,financial standing, and most of all the bluring of what real rights are.
We’re all fucked up !
I just came from a website where I was censored for telling a guy he was disgusting (oh boo hoo )
But its ok for him to say that our soldiers deaths were failures and that our president is everything but satan (Chavez laid that claim)
You cant say that a soldier is a phoney soldier because he lied about his service to get purple hearts and benefits and belittle a radio talk show host.
But you can steal because its somehow your right ?
And then actually have the nerve to make that case in court ?
Art should be free ?
Just about everything in this world has some aspect of art in it, Who are these idiots ?
I’m chef with decades of training and experience , and my work is definatly art, oh forget it , the arguement is just to friking looney to even bother.
pheistychick said,
October 5, 2007 at 1:25 pm
On October 5, 2007 at 10:55 am totaltransformation Said:
“That being said, I hope the recording industry shows some mercy and lowers the amount they expect her to pay. It would go a long way to improving their bad P.R.”
PR SCHMEE-AR! I’m sick and blasted tired of “PR”. Who cares? Why does industry have to constantly apologize for wanting to make money? Does it make people feel better when companies pretend like that’s not why they’re in business? Please! It’s intelligence insulting, amongst other things.
If people are paying for music online - which they are - and they’re buying lots of it - which they are - the price must be pretty fair, no? What do you think a song online is worth? Should the price of the song have anything to do with the size of profit that the companies are making from it? No! Emphatically, NO! Let the market work!
Companies should want to make as much money as they can. There’s nothing wrong with that, and frankly, I’m sick of companies apologizing for wanting higher profits. Those that do are not only insulting our intelligence, they are contributing to their own demise.
GREAT post, Ryan. THANK YOU.
totaltransformation said,
October 5, 2007 at 2:04 pm
“Why does industry have to constantly apologize for wanting to make money?”
I don’t expect them to apologize, only to show mercy. The case proved their point, now I would expect them (considering this woman’s position in life) to follow through with a merciful act. I am not expecting them to let her off without paying a dime, only to lessen the amount from 220,000.
After all, it would be the smart thing to do economically as well, as she can completely erase this judgment with a bankruptcy filing.
micky2 said,
October 5, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Not to change tunes but if I hear one more thing about Obamas pin I’m gonna shit down my leg.
Talk about the media waisting our time. Jeeez
arclightzero said,
October 5, 2007 at 2:47 pm
Interestingly, she did get off easy. She could have been nailed for all 1700+ songs and the jury could have awarded a maximum penalty of $150,000 per song. However, since the record companies were trying to prove a point instead of make a big spectacle, they cut the list down to 24 songs and the jury only awarded $9250 per song. Had the prosecution intended to go after her for the full amount she could have been liable for $255,000,000. While that seems absurd, legally they could have pursued that.
I don’t know if they are going to let her off the hook either. I think she really pissed them off when she lied. She also tossed her hard drive and bought a new one after she was caught, and tried to use it as evidence that she had done nothing wrong. Had she fessed up and just taken her licking for breaking the law I’m sure they would be willing to go easy on her. However, last I heard she was looking at a lifetime wage garnishment. It’s a bummer, but a bummer she brought on 100%.
micky2 said,
October 5, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Its no different than the sixties.
You couldnt just copy a bunch of vinyl and sell it to the highest bidder, or out of your trunk.
Maybe she would rather do some time, she’ll never pay the bill. I dont know , was she given a choice ?
totaltransformation said,
October 5, 2007 at 3:15 pm
“However, last I heard she was looking at a lifetime wage garnishment.”
Good luck with that. The below link is to the U.S. Chapter 7 Bankruptcy code. It lists all the debts that ARE NOT dischargeable in a bankruptcy- anything not on this list IS dischargeable.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode11/usc_sec_11_00000523—-000-.html
Unless the court redefines “willful and malicious” to mean something beside a fiduciary duty case or a premeditated assault, she can fully discharge this debt, provided none of it is part of an award of punitive damages. I don’t think it is, please correct me on that if I am wrong.
micky2 said,
October 5, 2007 at 4:16 pm
Well I actually believe you are right and your sources up to this point answer enough for me.
I was just curious, but not that curious.
I just hope one way or the other she gets the point.
Either way she got nailed.
I think they should come up with a actual number that would hurt her but not kill her, maybe in concert with some time. But thats just me.
arclightzero said,
October 5, 2007 at 5:11 pm
don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to see this woman get buried, but I also don’t want to see her get off with a slap on the wrist either. In this case, somebody had to be made an example of and if they give her so much as an inch it will send the wrong message to everybody else out there. In order to be taken seriously they have to go through with the punishment. Besides, the record companies just sought damages against her. The actual fines were imposed by the federal government. I’m not up to date on my law, but I don’t know if the record companies can release her from a federal order like that.
On the other hand, don’t be fooled. She more than likely has money. She’s an Ojibwa and most if not all of the Native Americans around these parts get a hefty sum of casino revenue every month. Depending on how the reservations are set up, some of the ones around here pay $5k for every man woman and child on the rez and much more if they actually work at the casino. I know we shouldn’t make any assumptions here, but it is very likely that she has enough money to be comfortable.
totaltransformation said,
October 5, 2007 at 5:19 pm
Well as long as she doesn’t wear a flag pin we should all be okay. LOL!
micky2 said,
October 5, 2007 at 7:48 pm
I’m sure we’ll hear about it no matter what.
in2thefray said,
October 7, 2007 at 5:40 pm
1. Excellent post. 2. The market isn’t actually driving online music sales. Apple created the .99 cent thing and some record companies have departed due to not enough say and profit. 3. It’s not really PR not to crucify someone to the point that the settlement will never be met.I find it laughable that people rage against $ 9 million hot coffee lawsuits but are ok with this.Closing with I won’t touch the Manifest Destiny thing and btw Obamas pin is on eBay.
arclightzero said,
October 8, 2007 at 10:38 am
What’s really sad is that these people think it’s ok to violate copyright law. Here’s an interesting website/organization who seems dedicated to ensuring “freedoms” such as copying and sharing music are upheld.
http://www.eff.org/share/petition/
And furthermore, I heard today that this woman is appealing the ruling. What a joke.