Judge Lowers Jammie Thomas' Damages to $54,000

An anonymous reader writes "Judge Michael Davis has slashed the amount Jammie Thomas-Rassett is said to owe Big Music from almost $2,000,000 to $54,000. 'The need for deterrence cannot justify a $2 million verdict for stealing and illegally distributing 24 songs for the sole purpose of obtaining free music. Moreover, although Plaintiffs were not required to prove their actual damages, statutory damages must still bear some relation to actual damages.' The full decision (PDF) is also available."

Comments

My favorite part

[Anonymous Coward]

Per NewYorkCountryLawyer:

Judge Davis also indicated that he found even the reduced amount to be "harsh" and that, were he -- rather than a jury -- deciding the appropriate measure of damages, the award would have been even lower than $54,000. But he felt that since the jury had determined the damages, it was his province to determine only the maximum amount a jury could reasonably award.

Re:My favorite part

[PunditGuy]

$750 minimum x treble damages for willful infringement x 24 violations = $54000.

Re:My favorite part

[EvanED]

Well, he might have chosen to triple it, but treble damages are not part of the statute.

This is correct; the decision addresses this issue:

Of course, the Copyright Act contains no treble damages provision. The Courts remittitur is not an attempt to create such a provision. Rather, the Court has labored to fashion a reasonable limit on statutory damages awards against noncommercial individuals who illegally download and upload music such that the award of statutory damages does not veer into the realm of gross injustice. Finding a precise dollar amount that delineates the border between the jurys wide discretion to calculate its own number to address ThomasRassets willful violations, Plaintiffs farreaching, but nebulous damages, and the need to deter online piracy in general and the outrageousness of a $2 million verdict is a considerable task. The Court concludes that setting the limit at three times the minimum statutory damages amount in this case is the most reasoned solution.

Re:My favorite part

[nacturation]

Bullshit. $54,000 is one THIRD of the median home price. Where do you get your information, and why did you bother posting that?

Quit trolling. The original statement was:

To put it in perspective, $54,000 would buy a house in her neighborhood.

So here you go. A house for $54,000 in Brainerd, Minnesota: http://kurilla.com/listing.cfm?MLS=188019

Some relation?

[Rix]

The wholesale price of 24 songs is $16.80. $54,000 is over 3,000 times the maximum possible damages.

Actual damages are 35 cents per work

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

The maximum actual damages is ~35 cents per infringed work, since the wholesale price is ~70 cents and the expenses are around ~35 cents. Under constitutional principles, the statutory damages awarded should not have exceeded $1.40 per infringed work, or a total of $33.60. Even the reduced award is 6428 times the actual damages, a grossly excessive amount.

She'll never work again

[Areyoukiddingme]

As has been pointed out, that's roughly the value of a house in the area of the country she lives in. She's married now so I'm guessing she'll quit her job (if she hasn't already), and never work for a wage again. Since she can't get rid of the judgment by declaring bankruptcy, she has no incentive to ever earn money that will only be taken away from her.

So the RIAA has only succeeded in removing one person from the labor pool. Congratulations.

Re:learn to read?

[Lord Bitman]

the average seed ratio is between 0 and 2 uploads per download. 100 is possible, but highly unlikely. 3000 is absolutely absurd, especially for someone who is supposedly only sharing 24 songs.