Mules, long noted for stubbornness, would seem to have nothing on either the music labels or Jammie Thomas-Rasset. Both sides have dug in deep and are prepared, almost unbelievably, to have a third trial on the question of whether Thomas-Rasset was a dirty P2P pirate... and of what she should pay if she was.

Thomas-Rasset was the first US defendant of the RIAA lawsuit campaign to take her case all the way to trial. That first trial in 2007 found her liable for copyright infringement and fined her $222,000. She was then granted a retrial by the judge on the grounds that he had been misled on one particular jury instruction that described simply "making available" a copyrighted file as copyright infringement. Citing Eight Circuit precedent, the judge decided that this wasn't good enough and that only actual proof of a file transfer could be counted.

At the second trial, in 2009, Thomas-Rasset was again found liable, but the jury this time fined her $1.92 million. Last week, federal judge Michael Davis decided that this was "monstrous" in its disproportionality and slashed the damages to $54,000. The recording industry could either accept his decision or request a third trial.