Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
I see that this woman has, not surprisingly been found guilty, but I do believe that the fine of US$222,000 is rather excessive for the crime. I suppose, though, that the idea is to send a clear signal to other "file sharers".
|
According to the reporting on News.com, the RIAA "may not require Thomas to pay the full amount" of her fine. Is this another example of making Thomas a very public scapegoat, to scare everyone else, then privately let her off the hook? (Not that that would work, with today's news services. In fact, the mere rumor of such an action has probably already empowered file sharers to ignore the decision.) If so, it makes a mockery of the decision, and the trial.