A federal judge has significantly reduced the penalty against Joel Tenenbaum, the graduate student that was convicted of sharing 30 unauthorized tracks online.
Last July, Tenenbaum was found guilty and told to pay $675,000 to the RIAA and record labels.
The judge has now reduced the verdict to $67,500, saying the damages award was “unconstitutionally excessive” given the fact that Tenenbaum made no money off the sharing of the music.
Judge Nancy Gertner added the following of the new verdict: The new damages “not only adequately compensates the plaintiffs for the relatively minor harm that Tenenbaum caused them; it sends a strong message that those who exploit peer-to-peer networks to unlawfully download and distribute copyrighted works run the risk of incurring substantial damages awards.”
$67,500 is three times the statutory minimum.
Despite being grateful, Tenenbaum still called the new verdict ‘ridiculous:’ “I still don’t have $70,000 — and $2,000 per song still seems ridiculous in light of the fact that you can buy them for 99 cents on iTunes,” Tenenbaum said. “I mean $675,000 was also absurd.”
The RIAA, unsurprisingly, was not happy: “With this decision, the court has substituted its judgment for that of 10 jurors as well as Congress. For nearly a week, a federal jury carefully considered the issues involved in this case, including the profound harm suffered by the music community precisely because of the activity that the defendant admitted engaging in.”
Result for: damages award
Appeals court judges have called the $290 million damages awarded to i4i in a patent infringement lawsuit against Microsoft. i4i had originally won its case against Microsoft, which resulted in $290 million damages to be paid by Microsoft and an injunction against the sale of Microsoft’s Word 2003 and Word 2007 applications.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stayed that injunction earlier this month. Judge Kimberly Moore of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took issue with the calculation of the damages; specifically that it assumed that users who bought a $90 version of the software from Microsoft would have paid considerably higher to pay for an alternative.
“Not everyone who is willing to pay $90 or $200 for a product is willing to pay $500,” she said. The grilling wasn’t just for i4i’s side however, as Judge Alvin Schall pressed Microsoft’s representatives on a claim that there is “no direct evidence” that anyone at Microsoft actually read the patent in question.
“I find it hard to believe that Microsoft didn’t read the patent,” the Judge said. i4i claims it approached Microsoft in 2000 for licensing negotiations, and that the two companies made joint presentations but never reached an agreement. Microsoft has acknowledged being in contact with i4i about the XML patent, but it has asked the appeals court to overturn the lower court’s decision.
Result for: damages award
Both the DISH Network and EchoStar announced yesterday that they have filed a lawsuit against TiVo hoping the court will find their DVR software does not infringe on any TiVo patents.
Late in January, the US Court of Appeals stated that DISH had infringed on a TiVo patent in building digital video recorders and upheld the original verdict of a damages award against DISH of $74 million plus interest. In April, the appeals court denied DISH’s request to have judges rehear the arguments related to the case.
DISH Network was formerly part of EchoStar Communications which has since spun off its technology assets to create EchoStar and DISH.
