I think the broken thing in this trial was a misdirection of efforts. The defendant was quite clearly guilty, (her cable modem, her mac, mysteriously replaced hdd). The defendant spent her time grandstanding obviously false innocence, thumbing her nose at the court and the intelligence of the jury. The RIAA representatives spent their time grandstanding obviously false damages, thumbing their collective noses at the whole justice system.

In the end, the whole thing was just a circus that missed the most obvious point: What is a reasonable course of action for dealing with this type of infringement? The sad part is, this trial was a wasted opportunity where we could have begun to address this issue. Instead the judge let it slip once again into a good ol' fashioned case of American side-show freakery.