True North

Today we are celebrating a victory for the big guy. Of course, this may sound counterintuitive; after all, according to popular opinion aren't we supposed to be rooting for the little guy while trying to take the big guy down?

Not if you ask me. I'm tired of the little guy sticking it to the big guy with blatant disregard for law or basic decency. And as such, I praise the jurors and Federal judge who found Jammie Thomas guilty of violating copyright laws for sharing music over the internet. This was a precedence-setting case that had a whole lot riding on it. Had Jammie won, it would have opened up the floodgates and turned the whole thing into a music sharing free-for-all. However, the victory by the recording companies sends a strong message to all of the people out there who thumb their noses at copyright law: Don't screw with us.

I am both thrilled and embarrassed that this happened in my own back yard. I am thrilled because it gave us a close up look at a very important Federal case. However, I am embarrassed because she used some really lame excuses in her defense and came across looking like a complete moron. Apparently I wasn't the only one, as the the jurors didn't think to highly of her excuses either, hence the "guilty" verdict. After all, did she really think that anybody would buy the excuse that on the particular night that she was caught that "she was the victim of a hacker who successfully 'spoofed' such identifying data to make it appear she was illegally sharing files?" Get real. The defense attorney ought to be slapped for trying to use that as his defense. After all, she was nailed by user name and IP address, which she admits were her own. Just not on that night.

But I digress. What is it about this that makes me so happy? I mean, shouldn't I feel bad for the single mother of two who is now responsible for coughing up $222,000 to the record companies? Wasn't she just the victim here?

No way.

The fact is, she broke the law. Like so many others out there who shrug off the law when they trade music and movies back and forth across the internet, she thumbed her nose at federal copyright law. It just so happens that she got nailed right to the wall for it. It could have been anybody, but it just so happened to be her. She can defend herself all she wants, but the fact remains that she was nailed sharing over 1700 songs and that is against the law; and I will always place the law above the supposed "rights" of the little guy.

Personally I am tired of all of the whining babies out there who claim that they have the right to break the law because art should be free. Art may be free, but producing, marketing and selling art is not. The only right people have when it comes to art is the right to enjoy it. To own it you must buy it, and perhaps that is where people are going so wrong these days. They lack the understanding of that distinction. They feel that it is their right to indiscrimiately own things that aren't theirs. But then again, isn't that the prevailing attitude out there right now anyway? People are claiming that they have the right to something for nothing. This extends from health care to music downloading. Is it only a matter of time before clothing starts disappearing off of shelves because people think they have the right to that too? But that's neither here nor there and I'm getting off topic.

With this victory, the music industry now has the precedence of a federal court and federal jury to use as leverage against these people. They now have the ability to tell people that not only are they breaking the law, but the law WILL be upheld in court and they will be punished for violating it. Will this stop the millions of people out there who laugh in the face of the law? No, of course not, but it will stop some of them now that they know that they can be prosecuted for violating that little warning that they blew off when they decided to share copyrighted material.

As a staunch defender of capitalism, I am pleased that the big guy took down the little guy this time. The message needs to be sent out that people have no right to get something for nothing - not even art. This small victory in Duluth, Minnesota was not for monetary gain. It was simply symbolic and it stands as a reminder that we are not a communal society. The community does not have rights to something that one person has. If ten people want what one person has, the other nine must obey the law and purchase one as well. It's not only the law, it's capitalism at work, and I that must always be upheld if we want to call ourselves Americans.

(This article is cross-posted from A [sometimes] Logical View of the Illogical, where comments are welcome and encouraged)