No. The accused was found guilty, the law allows, as the link in the OP states, a wide range of damages to be found, from $750 to $30,000 per violation, and it was the jury, his peers, that set the fine, not the court itself.
One could argue over the injustice of $30,000 per violation, but that's irrelevant to the fact that the boy did the crime, so he shouldn't be whining about doing the time (or paying the fine).
Even at the peak of piracy, before the corporations started their draconian campaign to attack content sharers, artists were still making money. They will always make money.
What this is about is profit maximization. A select few corporations in the recording industry didn't meet their quarterly projections for a few years, and got mad. They still made money, but because they didn't make as much money as the year before, this alarmed them. This is the context for the entire battle.
YES, they are technically correct about IP laws which is why they have the right to pursue it, but IP laws have never been enforced to this insane degree before. What they are lobbying for is more common enforcement, and harsher enforcement.
Art, literature, and information are not meant to be locked in a tower this way. ALL people should have access to it, because there will always be people who buy it!
I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
Other companies don't give a damn, and if they do, they aren't attacking their own society for it.
Their campaign will fail in the long term.
It is indeed. Except when the label is simply a statement of fact.Labeling people is a weak attempt to win an argument when you have nothing else to go on.
Wow. Am I awesome or what?