Search for: "Jammie Thomas-Rasset"
Results 161 - 180
of 247
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Dec 2009, 9:48 pm
Minn.), Docket 06-1479 In this case, the defendant was a single mother, Jammie Thomas-Rasset. [read post]
8 Dec 2009, 2:26 pm
The other defendant to go against the RIAA before a jury is Jammie Thomas-Rasset. [read post]
8 Dec 2009, 11:34 am
The only other accused file sharer to go to trial against the RIAA was Jammie Thomas-Rasset. [read post]
7 Dec 2009, 3:54 pm
It's a point Tom Sydnor made after Judge Michael Davis made similar comments critical of the first Jammie Thomas-Rasset verdict, and his words apply with equal force here:When judges develop opinions on questions of law or policy, they usually communicate them through extrajudicial means like speeches or articles. [read post]
5 Dec 2009, 11:23 am
†The RIAA was anxious to settle a similar case in which it won $1.92 million from Jammie Thomas-Rasset for illegally downloading 24 songs. [read post]
7 Nov 2009, 10:13 am
" Interestingly, plaintiff Elaine Scott's counsel Kiwi Camara has made similar arguments in defense of his client Jammie Thomas-Rasset, where a constitutional challenge to the jury's award of $1.92 million for Thomas-Rasset's infringement of 24 songs is fully briefed and awaits a decision by Judge Michael Davis in Minneapolis.Scribd is represented by Barry Flynn of Gordon & Rees' Houston office. [read post]
16 Oct 2009, 8:14 am
A ruling on a similar motion by Jammie Thomas-Rasset, who was ordered by a Minneapolis jury to pay the labels $1.92 million for similar infringement, could come any day.Reply Re Motion for Entry of Judgment [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 7:30 am
From a litigation standpoint, the industry has won every battle, beginning earlier this decade when it sued file-sharing companies Napster, LLC, and Kazaa BV out of business and continuing through this year, when the Recording Industry Association of America won a $1.92 million verdict against Jammie Thomas-Rasset, a Minnesota woman who had shared music over the Kazaa network. [read post]
8 Oct 2009, 1:40 pm
I argue the position that last summer's awards against peer-to-peer infringers Jammie Thomas-Rasset and Joel Tenenbaum, though large, do not violate the Constitution, and should not be analyzed under the "guideposts" for evaluating punitive damages set forth in BMW v. [read post]
5 Oct 2009, 2:34 am
" Scott's attorney is Kiwi Camara who, AmeriKat readers will recall, was Jammie Thomas Rasset's trial attorney.Nothing comes between the US Government and its addiction to its BlackBerrys IPKat readers will surely recall the extensive litigation both in the US and in the UK that took place between Research in Motion (RIM), creators of the BlackBerry, and Visto Corporation. [read post]
3 Oct 2009, 7:17 am
In June, a Minneapolis jury found single mother Jammie Thomas-Rasset liable for $1.92 million for downloading and sharing twenty-four songs on KaZaA's file-sharing network. [read post]
2 Oct 2009, 1:47 am
The record label plaintiffs in the Jammie Thomas-Rasset case have filed a notice of supplementary authority, identifying for the court a new case rejecting the defendant's argument that the Supreme Court's cases imposing constitutional limits on punitive damage awards apply to statutory damages.Verizon v. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 2:44 pm
The lawyer pressing the case is Kiwi Camara, the Houston attorney best known for representing Jammie Thomas-Rasset last summer in a file-sharing lawsuit brought by the Recording Industry Association of America. [read post]
1 Sep 2009, 4:56 pm
It was the same course the RIAA took this summer after it won a whopping $1.92 million verdict against a Minnesota woman, Jammie Thomas-Rasset, for purloining 24 music tracks on Kazaa. [read post]
31 Aug 2009, 1:05 pm
Jammie Thomas-Rasset Much of Jammie Thomas-Rasset’s legal arguments following this summer’s $1.92 million Recording Industry Association of America file sharing jury verdict against her don’t have much weight or precedent. [read post]
30 Aug 2009, 1:16 pm
Thomas-Rasset, the defendant has filed her reply brief in support of her motion to set aside the jury's $1.92 million verdict. [read post]
29 Aug 2009, 1:11 am
The parties in the record labels' case against Jammie Thomas-Rasset each filed their reply briefs in support of their post-trial motions on Friday.Here's Thomas-Rasset's Reply in support of her Motion for a New Trial, Remittitur, and to Alter and Amend the Judgment. [read post]
21 Aug 2009, 10:59 am
Today at the Progress & Freedom Foundation's blog, Tom Sydnor takes on Techdirt's numerous misstatements and mischaracterizations of the law regarding statutory damages, as well as the facts of the Jammie Thomas-Rasset case. [read post]
17 Aug 2009, 2:00 pm
When the Department of Justice last week filed its brief in defense of the constitutionality of the $1.92 million Jammie Thomas-Rasset verdict, it included the following paean to copyright, and statutory damages:Copyrights are of great value, not just to their owners, but to the American public as well. [read post]
16 Aug 2009, 4:31 am
Friday's Techdirt post on the Department of Justice's brief in the Jammie Thomas-Rasset case falls far, far short of any standard of accuracy and fairness. [read post]
