“Monstrous and Shocking” Music Downloading Fine
Monday, January 25th, 2010 by Harry Lewis
In buy generic alesse (ovral l) studies, many people with Parkinson's report that physical therapy can buy cephalexin without prescription provide effective pain relief. Often, people about to undergo cancer purchase generic allopurinol side effects and alcohol treatment and those who may have fertility concerns use storage augmentin for order facilities to keep sperm safe until ready to use. In discount pamoate no rx the U.S., the right to accommodations or special education services discount mirapex overnight delivery for those with an ADHD diagnosis is protected by law. viagra approved Here's information about the biosimilar* status for Emgality and Aimovig, cheapest levitra as well as details on their active ingredient. Finally, they buy cheap glyburide online can go on to sit a further examination for certification cialis without a prescription from the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA). Withdrawal symptoms that buying synthroid online have been reported include nausea, lightheadedness, muscle twitching, and anxiety. purchase cheap kenalog sale overdose Depending on your medical condition or other factors affecting your purchase erythromycin health, this drug may not be suitable for you. A cheap cialis pharmacy person may feel such as running away, fighting, or freezing, buy generic flovent and their behavior may not make sense to others around them..
That is the way appeals court judge Michael Davis described the $1.92 million fine levied on Jammie Thomas (now Jammie Thomas-Rasset) for illegally downloading 24 songs using Kazaa. This is the case we discuss in Chapter 5—Thomas was one of the only people who tried to fight the charges in court. That’s $80,000 per song.
The judge reduced the fine to $54,000, and apparently is unhappy that he couldn’t reduce it further, saying, “This reduced award is significant and harsh [but is] no longer monstrous and shocking.” This may still ruin Thomas, but suggests that the judiciary itself may scold Congress about the absurdity of the present statutory damages structure for copyright infringement.