My next album will cost $80,000...per song

The Capitol Records vs. Jammie Thomas-Rasset case has finally reached a verdict. Jammie Thomas-Rasset was proven to have downloaded and distrubed at least 24 songs using Kazaa's network. She actually had over 1700 songs on her computer in the "shared music" folder that were most likely illegally downloaded, but she was only charged with 24 songs.

The verdict rewarded Capitol Records the amount of $1,920,000, or $80,000 per song downloaded and distributed.

You may think this verdict is a little harsh.

It is.

$80,000 per song is 228,571 times the actual damages.

This case has been plagued with different issues ranging from testimony to evidence. One side was over-lawyered while the other was under-lawyered. Not to mention the fact that the plaintiff was not required to prove infrigment of the distribution right. Google "Capitol Records vs. Jammie Thomas-Rasset" and you can see all the problems involving this case. The reason I'm writing this post is because I can't wrap my head around the idea of $80,000 per song.

There are so many legal ways to download a song. You can go to iTunes and rip it for $.99 per song, you can go to Amazon and get one for $.79, and you can even go to lala.com and get a web song for $.10. That's right. $.10.

Now before we talk about the reasons why Thomas-Rasset couldn't download the song legally, let's talk about the value of a song. How much is a song worth? What does the artist who created, put blood, sweat and tears into, and labored over it think it's worth? Here's a better question,

Who is the RIAA to decide how much a song is worth?

Let's just get this straight. Jammie Thomas-Rasset absolutely illegally downloaded at least 24 songs. She broke the law. That we know is true. But how can you justify and prove (although since the plaintiff wasn't required to prove many things, this verdict is not suprising) that the damages incurred for downloading and distributing music illegally results in $80,000 per song?

You can't.

That's rediculous.

I'm an artist. I'd be ripped if my record label went to court over something like this. The artist will never see a dime of that $1,920,000. I understand that the RIAA and Capitol Records are just trying to make an example of Thomas-Rasset, but what they're essentially doing is making an example out of the United States. Let's give the rest of the world ANOTHER reason to laugh at us.

On a more positive note, Jammie Thomas-Rasset will never pay a dime of that money. The case will go to trial a third time.

Quick Fix: Charge Thomas-Rasset $.99/song and make her pay $24.00. The retail value for each song. Hell, you can even charge her tax so Uncle Sam is happy.