Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Bills, Bills, Bills


How ironic is it that Jammie Thomas of Brainerd, Minnesota is going to end up paying $9,250 for the Destiny’s Child song, “Bills, Bills, Bills”?

Personally, I’ve never even heard the song but I can’t imagine it’s worth that kind of cash – though Guns N Roses’ "Welcome to the Jungle" might come close.

I kid though and it’s not nice to make fun of thieves paying the price for their decisions. Anyway, that’s the way the record industry would have us all see her and all those nice old ladies whose grandchildren were sharing music on the very same computers they didn’t even know how to turn on.

But, who are they kidding? No one actually buys into all of that record company b.s. I guess except for those 12 Minnesota jurors who threw the book at Thomas.

Thomas isn’t taking this all lying down, though. She’s got her website, Free Jamie, up and running. She’s also blogging daily on her MySpace Blog about how she’s going to appeal the decision and reports that she had as of Saturday at 11:09 a.m. raised $13,909.26, that’s almost enough to pay for two of those 24 songs and about a third of her annual pay according to her website.

She’s even got a YouTube video up now.

Perhaps the best way to sum up the completely diverse and often times idiotic public perception on this highly controversial issues is to simply quote a couple of the many juxtaposing comments from YouTube:

Maverick092588 said, “hahahhaha, you lost! you're a f****** loser! hahahahaha, f*** you, you're poor now! hahahahahhaha, i hope you and your kids starve.”

Meanwhile, Skyler2dope says, “F*** THE RIAA.”

As if it all wasn’t ironic and interesting enough before she’s also now touting ways to legally find music online, with a little thing called Project Playlist, and even purports to have read the, “copyright and legal disclaimers” this time.

Either way I guess the RIAA wins. They’ve surely got some people pretty worried, others are on their side and finally others will do the “smart” thing and settle out of court.

No comments: