Last week a jury found P2P user Jamie Thomas guilty of sharing copyrighted music files, with most reasonable individuals finding the $1.9 million jury-awarded penalty ($80,000 per song) incredibly excessive, and perhaps even unconstitutional. Post-victory the RIAA was rather reserved, though this week the organization -- which recently started blogging -- appears to be feeling chatty. In a blog post, the RIAA proclaims that the Minnesota jurors who deemed $80,000 per song reasonable reflect the opinions of "the majority," who don't want the content future to be a "wild west":Strangely the RIAA didn't blog the fact that one of the artists who's songs were magically valued at $80,000 (revenue he won't see), Richard Marx, said he was "ashamed" to be any way involved in the judgment:Were the RIAA really listening to the majority, or even just the flood of critics suggesting alternative evolutionary paths in the age of broadband, they might actually learn something. Instead, the RIAA has been of the opinion that it makes more sense to punish customers and stomp around the Internet like myopic bullies. Were the RIAA's opinions really in tune with the majority, it's likely they wouldn't have to disable comments on their shiny new blog.