http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/32731.html The RIAA sees the face of evil, and it's a 12-year-old girl By Ashlee Vance in Chicago Posted: 09/09/2003 at 13:54 GMT The RIAA has nailed one of the most prolific file-traders in the U.S., filing a lawsuit against 12-year-old Brianna LaHara. When not at the playground with her friends, "Biggie Brianna" is trading music files from her home in New York. The little girl received one of the 261 lawsuits filed by the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) on Monday, according to the New York Post. She may look like a sweet and innocent child, but the RIAA says it's only going after major copyright violators at the moment. So you make the call. "I got really scared. My stomach is all turning," Brianna told the Post. "I thought it was OK to download music because my mom paid a service fee for it. Out of all people, why did they pick me?" It turns out that Brianna's mum paid a $29.99 service charge to KaZaA for the company's music service. Brianna, however, thought this meant she could download songs at will. How naive! Sorry! Couldn't resist.
Well, we can all sleep more securely in our beds tonight knowing that the most wanted criminals in the world will soon be endanger us no more!!
As long as listening to the music is their worst crime ever there is still hope for this world and we can all go safely to sleep IF THEY DON'T PLAY IT VERY LOUD!
It gets even more insane. http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/32740.html Dear old Mom forked over $2,000 to get the wolves off her little daughters back. I think she should sue the RIAA.
Hey root, did you check how much the copying and sharing with us this Register article is gonna cost you
Surpised an attorney didn't throw his hat in ring pro bono on this one. The case lacks foundation, in that there was insufficient warning or notification in conjunction with this access or its programs to establish Mens Rea (intent), applicable to both civil and criminal cases. It's only excacerbated by a young minor's ability to decern it. You can bet your behind if the shoe was on the other foot and this was a injury liability suit where a known hazard by the maker was not clearly decernable to the user, they'd lose in a minute. Both child and parent were not afforded clear advanced warning of a violation in this case. Thus, the plaintiff is vicariously responsible and negligent for the basis of their own claim. Case dismissed! They should appeal - they'll win. If you settle, it's moot, but others should fight it. Naturally they pick on those who can least afford a defense. Regards, Rick
I knew it the master mind to the under ground cyber world criminal is actualy this 12 year old little girl most wanted like ted bundy al copone and baby face
Nice to know information Rickster. I don't use P2p or do any file sharing, but perhaps I can pass the info to others that might have some questions.
lol yup i think we should all publisize this more on every bord to give riaa the media it truely deserves for going after children under legal age as they are cold and heartless people
