The Department of Justice has published a brief that argues why, according to the law, the $1.92 million fine applied to Jammie Thomas for illegally sharing 24 songs via Kazaa was constitutional.In a nutshell: it's a deterrent."The current damages range provides compensation for copyright owners because,, there exist situations in which actual damages are hard to quantify," the DOJ's lawyers wrote in a brief . "Furthermore, in establishing that range, Congress took into account the need to deter millions of users of new media from infringing copyrights in an environment where many violators believe that they will go unnoticed."According to a 1999 amendment to the Copyright Act of 1976, a violator is liable for up to $150,000 for each infringed work: in this case, the 24 songs that Thomas shared.Again, Congress wrote, according to the DOJ: " Many computer users are either ignorant that copyright laws apply to Internet activity, or they simply believe that they will not be caught or prosecuted for their conduct. Also, many infringers do not consider the current copyright infringement penalties a real threat and continue infringing, even after a copyright owner puts them on notice that their actions constitute infringement and that they should stop te activity or face legal action."So, as we all knew: the RIAA is sending a message.