RIAA equates file sharing to child pornography!

Getting nervous that Jammie Thomas would get a retrial for the judge mistakenly instructing the jury that they could find Thomas liable for infringement absent of proof that members of the public had downloaded music from her Kazaa share folder, the RIAA back the MPAA claim that no proof should be necessary that actual copying had occurred stating "Requiring proof of actual transfers would cripple efforts to enforce copyright owners’ rights online – and would solely benefit those who seek to freeload off plaintiff’s investment".

Since we don’t live in America (:p), the above sounded totally ludicrous to us…  but after speaking to a couple of Americans they told us (to quote) “Anyone with half a brain would find this ridiculous too, the jury on Thomas’ case were giving misleading/wrong information and hence deliberated just five minutes before coming to the only conclusion that they could come to based on the false information/instructions presented to them, it does not take a genius to figure that an injustice has been done, so its but fair that she get a chance again at a fair trial”.
Looks like everyone (but the MAFIAA and their affiliated scum) share the same opinion whether or not they are this side of the pond.

Other than the **AA no one would be so stupid as to say “Requiring proof of actual transfers would cripple efforts..”, can you for a minute imagine a prosecutor or cop trying to convince anyone that people should be convicted for a serious crime like murder based on their word because finding all the details to convict someone is either too hard or impossible?

Now, before you start thinking that we are trying to equate a copyright case with a murder case, isn’t hitting someone for 150k per infringement almost ‘murder by ruination’ (Hey! We made up a new phrase to rival the music industries’ accusing OINK users of  ‘Conspiracy to Defraud the Music Industry’!)

Contrary to the MAFIAA’s thinking, laws were not created based on how well it suits people to implement them, but usually to give both sides (the accuser and the accused) an equal opportunity to make their points. Something, we are sure the MAFIA sees as a little inconvenient: as being judge, jury and executioner is so much easier and less time consuming.

While one user on a very popular news site wittily commented “Yeah, actual proof does tend to cripple pointless cases.” this is not such a pointless case, in fact this case could set precedent and stop the RIAA’s present extortion racket almost dead in its tracks, stopping them from going after any more (mostly innocent) poor souls (including dead people) as well as legally bring into question the ~20,000 people they have already extorted…um, sued in the US.

The RIAA’s attorney went on to equate file sharing to child pornography by writing:  
"And in the criminal context, sharing child pornography on Kazaa is unlawful distribution of illegal obscenity."
Which an astute reader quickly pointed out is the MAFIAA’s old trick to try and confuse the issue as copyright infringement is based on _copyright_ law where as child pornography is based on _criminal_ law and have totally different statutes that govern them.
He goes on to remind us of a quote by then MPAA Jack Valenti (back in the 1970/80’s during the Betamax/VCR case) who said: "I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone."

Strange, after around forty years, the thinking is the same.

(Full article on Wired.com, along with some very interesting comments)

Tags: child pornography, Jammie Thomas, JammieThomas, no proof, RIAA