

Student Must Pay $675,000 in Downloading Case  - aheilbut
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/07/31/business/AP-US-TEC-MusicDownload.html

======
modeless
It could not possibly be more clear that these statutory damages are
excessive. How could any court fail to rule that a $600,000 fine (let alone $2
million!) to an individual for non-commercial copyright infringement violates
the eighth amendment to the constitution? "Excessive bail shall not be
required, _nor excessive fines imposed_ , nor cruel and unusual punishments
inflicted."

Hopefully the defending lawyers in these cases can stop pissing off their
judges long enough to make this blindingly obvious argument.

~~~
jrockway
Pissing off the judge might be a good strategy. If he pisses off the judge
enough for him to make a questionably-legal ruling, he gets the chance to
appeal and set precedent.

~~~
modeless
That's awfully risky for the defendant. If I was the one on the stand I don't
think I'd permit my lawyers to risk sticking me with a $2 million fine just so
they could set precedent, even if they were from Harvard.

------
aichcon
_"Joel Tenenbaum, of Providence, R.I., admitted he downloaded and distributed
30 songs. The only issue for the jury to decide was how much in damages to
award the record labels. ... Under federal law, the recording companies were
entitled to $750 to $30,000 per infringement. But the law allows as much as
$150,000 per track if the jury finds the infringements were willful."_

So at $675,000 / 30 songs, the jury decided that each track was worth $22,500?

I understand that copyright laws should exist. But it really bothers me that
not only were such high values set in the laws, but that the jury enforced
them even though they had the option of choosing lesser amounts.

A part of the jury's job is to provide an additional, more 'human'
interpretation of the case ... in this case I think they failed.

~~~
grellas
The law in this area is horribly stacked against any individual caught up in
such a case, with the full legal weight of the music industry bearing down on
him.

See this write-up from earlier today (<http://bit.ly/qMtUe>) on how Joel
Tenenbaum was basically worn down on the stand until he wound up finally
admitting to liability.

Once he did that, the judge took that issue away from the jury. This means the
jury was instructed that the defendant was already found liable and that their
sole job was to pick a damage number using the federal statutory guidelines.

The judge had already gutted major parts of the defense _before_ the case ever
got to trial (for example, fair use was tossed out as a defense).

In such a context, even a sympathetic jury could have done little or nothing,
though it appears this jury was not sympathetic.

The bullying tactics used by the music industry in these cases are atrocious
and represent among the worst that the law has to offer. What is needed here
is a broader solution likely involving a revamp of the copyright laws.

~~~
jacquesm
The music industry is not helping themselves by winning these cases. I know
that sounds contradictory but people that otherwise couldn't care less are
getting worked up about this.

The bigger the amount the worse the PR. People are not scared, they're angry.

~~~
cellis
I actually think you're wrong, sadly. People in the real world, people that
are likely to download songs, are not digital cognoscenti like members of HN.
They read about this (or watch it on TV, most likely) and think "Shit! Tell
Johnny to stop downloading!". Fear tactics _do_ work. So, i would bet that the
RIAA is very happy about the message they are sending.

~~~
jacquesm
If they would be happy they'd continue these tactics. They are realizing that
they are losing the PR battle fast so they've decided to stop these cases, new
ones are not being brought. To avoid setting bad precedent they have to
continue the ones that are in court (or they'd open themselves up to all kinds
of trouble wrt to the fees they've already received in settlements, a good
case could be made for extortion: "look, as soon as a case goes to court they
drop it")

Or that's my understanding of it, maybe some legal whiz here can shine some
light on that.

------
breck
Can someone explain to me what happens now? Does he just declare bankruptcy
and move on? My guess is, as a college student, he has little assets so a
$20,000 or $675,000 judgement would be the same to him (=bankruptcy).

Am I wrong? Are damages like this equivalent to student loans(ie. bankruptcy
does not erase them)?

Please help me understand this. Thanks!

~~~
nostrademons
I've often wondered what I'd do if I got hit with a lawsuit that was worth
more than my entire expected lifetime earnings and couldn't discharge it
through bankruptcy.

I think I'd simply choose to opt out of the economy entirely - "If you're just
going to garnish all the money I make, well, I just won't make any money." But
I wouldn't just sit around (I'd probably starve if I did that...) Instead, I'd
work on high-risk, high-reward projects and release them all as open-source,
with an eye towards being as disruptive as possible. I could continue to live
by bumming meals and places to crash off folks who benefit from my work, even
if they don't actually pay me.

Much like Richard Stallman.

~~~
TriinT
_"I could continue to live by bumming meals and places to crash off folks who
benefit from my work, even if they don't actually pay me."_

What makes you think people would be that generous? Seriously.

Have you ever been in a position where someone else is legally entitled to
take possession of your entire present worth? I have. It's a nightmare. Just
imagine what it feels like to be in a position where someone is legally
allowed to rape you for the rest of your life... the frustration and anger
would not allow me to focus on any productive work. Maybe it would work
differently for you.

------
vaksel
By comparison:

    
    
        On September 24, 2001, the case was partially settled. 
        Napster agreed to pay music creators and copyright 
        owners a $26 million settlement for past, unauthorized 
        uses of music.
    

So by this case's logic, Napster was only guilty of stealing 1155 songs.

------
jacquesm
To put this into perspective, here is a list of fines for various crimes:

<http://www.cslib.org/finespenalt.htm>

~~~
chewbranca
Wow, according to that link a "Class A felony (murder)" has a fine of up to
$20,000, but he's getting fined $22,500 per song? That's disgusting. The
tyranny of the RIAA has gone on long enough.

~~~
wmf
But he's not going to prison. For murder I think fines would be the least of
your worries.

~~~
jacquesm
So, let's contrast it then with compensation to crime victims:

OJ Simpson had to pay 33.5 million to the relatives of the woman he murdered
(but has only paid a fraction of that to date)

According to <http://www.wrongful-death-network.com/news.shtml> only 27 states
even allow punitive damages in a wrongful death case.

------
thedjpetersen
As a student that essentially eliminates his future as he will most likely be
expelled from his university and have trouble gaining admission at another
university. Bad luck that he has to take the fall for 30 songs, as there are
many university students who pirate thousands.

------
petercooper
Wouldn't a jail term be less life destroying than this? I guess America's
judiciary is no more intelligent than any other out there.

~~~
rjett
My guess is that this guy will declare bankruptcy if he doesn't get this
ruling overturned on appeal. Of course there are other secondary financial
consequences for him like more than likely getting kicked out of school and
having trouble securing a decent job in the future.

~~~
petercooper
Hopefully someone can correct me, but I thought penalties weren't wiped clean
by bankruptcy?

------
ryanwaggoner
Here's a question: can you be extradited and imprisoned for failing to pay
damages from a civil trial? If these damages are not dischargeable in
bankruptcy, seems like your best option might be to just leave the country,
rather than spend your entire life in financial slavery.

~~~
BrentRitterbeck
It depends on what country you go to and whether you want to define a civil
trial's verdict as a debt now owed. Some places still do have debtors prison,
like Dubai. And, while you may not be extradited, there are still ways to
force people to pay up even if they leave the country.

~~~
mahmud
Yes, they get you when you come in to renew your passport or add new pages.
They catch plenty of "kidnapping parents" that way.

~~~
ryanwaggoner
I get that they do that if you're fleeing the law, but if you're just avoiding
paying damages awarded in a civil case, do they not let you leave the country?

