Slashdot Mirror


UMG Calls Infringement Damages "Excessive"

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Why would UMG, one of the four major RIAA members, consider an infringement award 'grossly excessive'? Naturally, because they were the ones ordered to pay it. While they had no trouble with Jammie Thomas being ordered to pay $222k, some 13,214 times the actual costs, they thought that being ordered to pay ten times the actual damages in Bridgeport v. Justin Combs was just too much. Then again, maybe that's why they didn't complain back when the increased statutory damages section was cut from the PRO-IP Act? Now if they could just cut the rest of the act."

5 of 126 comments (clear)

  1. Actually I wonder by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why are they against excessive damages? They can easily afford going into revision again and again until a judge agrees with them (and some judges still have some semblance of sanity, so eventually they will hit one when they climb the judical ladder).

    Their victims usually don't have the money to do the same. Though... should it ever hit me, before I hand over my life savings to them, I pump it into the courts. At least there it MIGHT somehow be used for good. After such a trial, you're broke and in debt for life anyway.

    Honestly, I wonder why nobody followed the thought train of "Hmm... my life's wasted now anyway. Why not blow up the joint and go out with a bang?"

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Actually I wonder by zappepcs · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why are they against excessive damages? They can easily afford going into revision again and again until a judge agrees with them..... IANAL but I'd think that if even one person gets something like 13000 times the actual value for damages, then everybody who wants to sue them will ask for it too. It sets a precedent that they don't want to have to pay for. In fact, I expect that any week now someone's lawyer will come up with the right defense or technical argument to leave the **AA's legal strategy in tatters and they will then be open for multiple suits if not class action suits. With the growing volumes of legal opinion against them, it is only a matter of time until all judges are aware that the **AA legal team is operating on very thin legal ice.

      Yes, they have been successful thus far using very shaky technical experts and such, but that will fall apart quickly, and I'm betting that ISP cooperation with P2P makers and their arguments for throttling P2P traffic will remove all doubt as to the illegal nature of the **AA suits. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, so the saying goes. I believe a couple of really sound, well placed offensive legal suits will put the **AA on defense to the point that they will be spending hundreds of millions trying to cover their tracks, and slowly their legal team will be dismissed and forgotten.

      Technically, Sony's rootkit should have brought entirely more damages. The school teacher in Russia that got sued for illegal copies of Windows is another example of wrong doing by well meaning laws, so the problem is not just the **AA. The DMCA and it's precedents seem to set the pace of wrong doing. We have seen the DMCA used against large corp. entities already, and in wrong ways. It is things like this that will lead to the halt of the **AA legal teams. As more technical knowledge is handed to the general public and, more importantly the legal system, their strategy will disappear.

      We know that they basically have to flout the law to get your IP address/name connection and that will be shown. The legal system is slow and not all argument is germane to all cases, but it will happen. We need something like watergate to be uncovered so that their righteous position is removed, then all will sort itself out. They are a dying industry and are fighting death with all that they have. Even those resources are not inexhaustible. Several music groups are actually seeing no benefit in letting the RIAA continue their legal antics. Look at how much artists were paid from the Napster winnings.... zero! The cost of those legal teams is quite high, and they really aren't seeing anything from it. Every time they do anything it hits the news and more people see what asshats they really are. Bad PR is costing them quite a bit of money and I expect that we'll see it mentioned in upcoming financial reports. Loss of revenues eventually has to be blamed on market forces and those market forces are affected by bad PR.

      It's a slow process, but losing badly in court sets the precedent that will speed it up. This is what the death bed of the RIAA looks like. To see more Google for SCO or just pop on over to Groklaw.

      Non-obligatory bashing: MS is in a similar position but trying hard not to bleed out before the doctor gets out to the house to see how bad it is.

      This is the way of business. Some folks just make bad decisions and the company and consumers have to live with it until things change a little at a time. The mere fact that they believe the award to be too high is a signal that I'm right. Of course they have to say that to continue to bolster their own position. The trouble is that they are now looking at what the hard place and the rock to see what they actually look like from a short distance. I imagine it will get a bit messier before it starts looking better. It will take a few more awards against them first.
  2. Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What units are they using to make the comparison between the two cases? The 13,214 ratio is $damages/$song, while the 10 ratio is $damages/$song/number of copies. If they'd use the same $damages/$song ratio for Universal, the answer would be 5,000,000.

  3. The Golden Rule by southpolesammy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "He who has the gold, makes the rules."

    Well, ok. Technically, the rules aren't being made here, but this is just another example of the perversion of justice that exists among the elite in America. By and large, the America's "upper class", which include the wealthy, the politicians, celebrities, athletes, and corporations, aren't subject to the same blind justice as everyone else in this country.

    If you have money and/or power, you have a way out.

    --
    Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
  4. Re:Record Companies Owe ME ! by maxume · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Read one of your tickets.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.