Here's how it got as far as it did
as posted by Moonrider on another forum)
"Well, she could have originally settled for $5000.
She chose to fight.
She was found guilty and fined $200,000.
The RIAA offered - AFTER THE JUDGEMENT - to settle for $25,000 and a statement of guilt. (12.5% of the award)
She appealed the judgement to a jury.
The jury of her peers discovered she'd tampered with evidence, perjured herself, and discovered even MORE evidence of her guilt. The jury of her peers determined she should pay damages of $1.9 million dollars.
The judge felt that was extreme and reduced it to $54,000 (2.8% of the award) and the guilty verdict.
After being given a break twice, and only having to pay pennies on the dollar for damages, Ms. Thomas-Rasset . . .
Appeals to another jury of her peers, who confirmed every single finding of the previous two trials. They apparently did feel that the $1.9 mil might have been too high though. They decided she only need pay $1.2 million.
I'm perfectly comfortable with throwing her under the bus at this point."
I feel exactly the same way.