When she was in college, Jammie Thomas-Rasset wrote a case study on Napster, the online peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing network, and knew that it was shut down because it was illegal. Later, Capitol Records, Inc., which owns the copyrights to a large number of music recordings, discovered that "tereastarr"—a user name associated with Thomas-Rasset’s Internet protocol address—had made twenty-four songs available for distribution on KaZaA, another P2P network. Capitol notified Thomas-Rasset that she had been identified as engaging in the unauthorized trading of music. She replaced the hard drive on her computer with a new drive that did not contain the songs in dispute. Is Thomas-Rasset liable for copyright infringement?What action did Thomas-Rasset have to take in order to share twenty-four copyrighted songs available for distribution on KaZaA?SelectA. Shared her downloaded music files using KaZaAB. Shared her purchased music files with a friend2. Is file sharing always prohibited?SelectA. YesB. No3. File sharing is prohibitedSelectA. when it is used to download and store copyrighted musicB. when it is used to listen to music.4. Did Jammie share copyrighted music?SelectA. YesB. No5. Sharing copyrighted music constitutes infringement under theSelectA. Copyright ActB. Computer Fraud and Abuse Act6. Capitol notified Thomas-Rasset that she had been identified as engaging in the unauthorized trading of music. She replaced the hard drive on her computer with a new drive that did not contain the songs in dispute. Can Thomas-Rasset remedy her wrongful conduct by replacing her hard drive?SelectA. YesB. No7. Why or why not? The illegal file sharing Select A. was B. was not already done.8. Who is an innocent infringer? A person who Select A. is B. is not aware and had no reason to believe that his or her acts constituted copyright infringement.9. Was Thomas-Rasset an innocent infringer?SelectA. Yes B. No10. Why? She had just done a case study on Napster and knew file sharing wasSelectA. RightB. Wrong11. Did Thomas-Rasset help her case by replacing her hard drive to conceal her acts?SelectA. Yes B. No12. Was Thomas-Rasset’s act of replacing her hard drive ethical?SelectA. YesB. No13. The civil remedies of Select A. injunction B. damages C. criminal conviction and Select A. injunction B. damages C. criminal conviction are available to the owners of the copyrighted songs.14. Would a court likely find Thomas-Rasset reliable for copyright infringement?SelectA. YesB. No15. WHAT IF THE FACTS WERE DIFFERNT?What if Thomas-Rasset had not shared files, but rather used digital samplings in her college project presentation? Would that have possibly changed the result?SelectA. YesB. No16. Why?1. Select A.Some courts have not found digital sampling illegal. B. Thomas-Rasset's use was fair use for educational purposes.C. Thomas-Rasset may have been an innocent infringer.D. Thomas-Rasset's motives were altruistic.E. Thomas-Rasset did not know about copyright law.2. SelectA.Some courts have not found digital sampling illegal. B. Thomas-Rasset's use was fair use for educational purposes.C. Thomas-Rasset may have been an innocent infringer.D. Thomas-Rasset's motives were altruistic.E. Thomas-Rasset did not know about copyright law.3. SelectA.Some courts have not found digital sampling illegal. B. Thomas-Rasset's use was fair use for educational purposes.C. Thomas-Rasset may have been an innocent infringer.D. Thomas-Rasset's motives were altruistic.E. Thomas-Rasset did not know about copyright law.