8th Circuit Upholds $220,000 Verdict In Jammie Thomas Case

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit has upheld the initial jury verdict in the case against Jammie Thomas, Capitol Records v. Jammie Thomas-Rasset. This case was the first jury trial for a file-sharing suit brought by the major record labels, and focused on copyright infringement for 24 songs. The Court of Appeals has ruled that the award of $220,000, or $9250 per song, was not an unconstitutional violation of Due Process. The Court, in its 18-page decision (PDF), declined to reach the 'making available' issue, for procedural reasons."

Comments

Good Lord

[Dr. Sheldon Cooper]

Having people who know nothing about technology make case law about technology is like having a Capuchin monkey fix the brakes on your car: cute and funny at first, but ultimately a bad idea that is also highly dangerous.

Re:Good Lord

[man_of_mr_e]

This isn't a case of lack of knowledge of the technology. It's a case of the law being absurd, and the judges hands being tied. It's absurd that sharing a couple dozen songs can carry a greater liability than murdering someone (I'm talking civil law here).

The punishment certainly does not fit the crime, but that law allows these kinds of damages.

If you don't like it, lobby your lawmakers.

Re:Good Lord

[hesaigo999ca]

>If you don't like it, lobby your lawmakers.
hahahahahahahahaha.......hahahahahahahahahaha.........hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha....

It will not change anything

[Anonymous Coward]

We will continue to share and the labels will learn their place.

Statutory damages are devoid of all meaning

[Missing.Matter]

From the Wikipedia article:

1st civil jury trial Statutory damages of $222,000 ($9,250/song).
2nd civil jury trial Statutory damages of $1,920,000 ($80,000/song).
Remittitur Statutory damages reduced to $54,000 ($2,250/song).
3rd civil jury trial Statutory damages of $1,500,000 ($62,500/song).
Damages reduced Statutory damages reduced to $54,000 ($2,250/song).

Seriously, statutory damages are a joke. The number is completely arbitrary and jumping around, seemingly randomly, from $54k to almost $2m. Isn't this a pretty good sign that things are FUBAR, and "statutory damages" is devoid of all meaning? The $150,000 statutory damages maximum (per infringement) was written into law with a very different context in mind than it's being applied to (industrial scale for-profit copyright infringement). These statutory damages seriously are completely defunct, yet copyright holders are exploiting them to no end. *We* as a society have provided *them* copyright to promote the *useful* arts and sciences. I think it's becoming very clear the art they are producing is no longer useful, but a determent to society. Perhaps *we* as a society should take those rights away, or at the very least severely curb them to avoid this utter nonsense.

Piracy = theft?

[OldSport]

Industry shills are constantly trying to convince the public that piracy = theft, but punishments like this make it seem more like piracy = murder. In my home state, anyway, "a person convicted of the offense of retail theft of merchandise having a retail value not in excess of $100.00 shall be punished by a fine of not more than $300.00 or imprisonment for not more than six months, or both." Torrent the same CD, however, and you're out $150,000 ($10,000/song, assuming 15 songs on a CD).

Note to potential downloaders: just steal the goods you want. You'll get off a lot lighter that way.

Due process?

[Hatta]

Due process is guaranteed by the 5th and 14th amendments. The problem with this case is excessive fines, prohibited by the 8th amendment. Why wasn't this an issue in this appeal?