from http://www.arstechnica.com/
"There has mostly been talk thus far and little action, but the Department
of Justice says it may be ready to file criminal lawsuits against
individuals [1] who distribute or receive unauthorized copyrighted
material over the Internet. Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Malcolm believes
that "criminal prosecutions of copyright offenders are now necessary to
preserve the viability of America's content industries." Malcolm also
believes that people who trade copyrighted material think they are
participating in a legal activity. I certainly think people who download
copyrighted works understand that such distribution--barring provisions
such as fair use--is not authorized, and it is not surprising to see
businesses continue to look for means to discourage distribution of
copyrighted works.
"Some prosecutions that make that clear could be very helpful...I think
they would think twice if they thought there was a risk of criminal
prosecution," said [RIAA President Cary] Sherman, who was on the same
conference panel.
I'm not too confident that lawsuits would have the effect Sherman is
hoping for. Although infrequent, there have already been civil suits or
warnings issued to private individuals, and they have served as minor
deterrents to the file-sharing community at large. Criminal lawsuits
carrying with them the possibility of prison sentences may generate
further animosity against groups such as the RIAA and may be difficult to
initiate because of the "schooling" effect of millions of systems
participating in file sharing. Only servers would seem to stand out from
the crowd.
The article cites the No Electronic Theft (NET) Act [2], which defines
illegal  activity and maximum penalties for copyright infringement:
Criminal infringement: Any person who infringes a copyright willfully for
purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, or by the
reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any
180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more
copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000....
For purposes of this subsection, evidence of reproduction or distribution
of a copyrighted work, by itself, shall not be sufficient to establish
willful infringement.
...
The term "financial gain" includes receipt, or expectation of receipt, of
anything of value, including the receipt of other copyrighted works.
Therefore, receipt of a work of value would be defined as "financial gain"
even if no money is involved. The NET Act excerpt does not clarify how the
value of a work is determined; an album or movie could be worth only $15
to millions of dollars depending on whether the value is assessed from the
perspective of the consumer or copyright holder.
The statute of limitations:
507. Limitations on actions
(a) Criminal Proceedings.--No criminal proceeding shall be maintained
under the provisions of this title unless it is commenced within five
years after the cause of action arose.
(b) Civil Actions.--No civil action shall be maintained under the
provisions of this title unless it is commenced within three years after
the claim accrued.
The penalties are too extensive to list here, but they can be found in
Section 2319: Criminal infringement of a copyright. In general, first-time
criminal offenses will carry a maximum prison sentence of 1 year.
I'm still not sure where the DOJ would start in choosing people to
prosecute because of the aforementioned "schooling" effect, but my guess
would be that, just like speeding, primarily the most prominent
individuals who operate large servers or transfer the most data will be
targeted in order to discourage more recreational file sharers. Thanks to
MonaLisaOverdrive for pointing out this story.
"
[1] http://news.com.com/2100-1023-954591.html?tag=fd_top
[2] http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/17-18red.htm
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork