Thursday, July 02, 2009

p2pnet reports that Thomas-Rasset is going to file appeal

According to this report in p2pnet.net, the attorneys for Jammie Thomas-Rasset have indicated that they are planning to file an appeal in Capitol Records v. Thomas-Rasset.



Keywords: lawyer digital copyright law online internet law legal download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie independent label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs intellectual property portable music player

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yeah!

To this man an outrageous jury verdict (just what kind of idiots who have time for jury duty live in that town anyway?) makes the case more worthy of Appellate, and eventually Supreme Court, review than some minimum hand slap with $300K of hidden legal fees due as the true punishment in the case.

And hopefully to judges more deliberative than the current nominee to SCOTUS.

{The Common Man Speaking}

M. Yass said...

That's great, but she's going to have to post a cash bond of 1.5x the amount of the judgment in order to appeal. Where's she going to get that money, pray tell?

Another Kevin said...

M.Yass - Look up 'appeal in forma pauperis.'

Richard Altman said...

Ray,
Don't you think that a post-verdict motion for judgment n.o.v. or for a new trial would have more chance of success, not to mention being a lot easier than an appeal? Any info on why her lawyers didn't do that?

M. Yass said...

Another Kevin said...

M.Yass - Look up 'appeal in forma pauperis.'


That only applies to the docketing fees.

Donald said...

Yass since the appeal will most likely be on the award being unconstitutional it will probably be heard in a federal court where Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(d) applies. In quite a few cases the courts suspend the bond requirement for "The public good"

Eric said...

This is awful. They are arguing the unconstitutional award, but that does not change the fact that she was found guilty of willful copyright infringement with the crappy evidence provided by media sentry ( which should have never gone to trial in the first place ).