A woman steals something from someone.  Actually, she stole 24 things.  And they were from a company, not a person.  Actually, they are illegal music downloads and she didn't really steal from the copyright holder as much as she obtained copyrighted material from a third party without the copyright holder's permission.  It's still theft.  And you won't hear me argue otherwise because I do believe copyright infringement is a serious crime.

So did she perform an illegal act?  Yes, absolutely.  Should she be forced to pay a civil penalty beyond simply the market value of the product she stole?  Yes, sure.  That's part of the punishment for committing a crime and its also a deterrent for others thinking about committing the same crime.   Should she have to pay a penalty that is 80,000 times the market value of the product?  pfffbbbtbttttttt!  WTF?!  HELL NO!

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/18/minnesota.music.download.fine/

This is ridiculous.  These types of excessive fines do nothing to add value to copyrighted material like music, books, and videos.  If anything, it just makes copyright holders look like petty bullies, diminishing the value of the works that they are protecting.  As a copyright holder of my own music, I am sympathetic to the concerns of copyright holders regarding illegal downloading of music.  I was a big defender of shutting down Napster (the original highly illegal one).  I also have no sympathy for The Pirate Bay.  But this case… This case is just absolutely ridiculous.  It is beyond excessive.  IANAL, but to me this case seems to be an Eighth Amendment violation.

The punishment needs to fit the crime.  Make her pay the court fees, the market value of the music, plus a $250 civil penalty and call it a day.