Judge slashes downloading penalty

[Forkboy]

Calls $675k award in BU student’s case ‘excessive’

In a major setback for the recording industry, a Boston judge yesterday slashed by 90 percent a $675,000 damages award that a Boston University graduate student had been ordered to pay to four record labels for illegally downloading 30 songs and sharing them online.

US District Court Judge Nancy Gertner ruled that the amount a federal jury ordered Joel Tenenbaum to pay last July was “unconstitutionally excessive’’ in light of what she described as the modest harm caused to the record labels. She cut the award to $67,500, one-tenth the original sum.

“There is no question that this reduced award is still severe, even harsh,’’ she wrote in a 62-page order. “It 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 in curring substantial damages awards.’’

But the reduction, she said, also sends an equally important message that the constitutional protection against grossly excessive punitive awards in civil suits protects not only big corporations but “ordinary people like Joel Tenenbaum.’’

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/07/10/file_sharing_damages_reduced_tenfold/

[Loudmxr]

1. I am happy about this. However how much of this money will go to the artists?

[Cleobulus]

4. About as much as they would get if it were bought CDs instead...

about 20 bucks.

[hobbit709]

7. None of it goes to the artists

The RIAA uses that money to further their going after people. I know quite a few musicians and not a one has ever seen a penny of that money.

[Cleobulus]

8. I know I was making a joke...

the artists don't make a whole lot of money off of CDs that are sold.

[FLAprogressive]

2. I'm sure RIAA will call this "judicial activism"

[FunkyLeprechaun]

3. Tenenbaum is a friend of mine

I have always thought that the damages were ridiculous. People are still downloading music even in the face of this case. How do you prevent that? Taking everyone to court isn't the answer.

[LARED]

5. “unconstitutionally excessive’’ ???

I agree with the decision, and it should have been reduced further, but what the heck does “unconstitutionally excessive’’ mean?

[AlecBGreen]

6. we are protected against "cruel & unusual punishment"

[Art_from_Ark]

9. Even $67,000 sounds excessive

That's more than $2000 per song

[AlecBGreen]

10. i agree

[dragonlady]

12. Not sure if there's anything in the Constitution that applies

Cruel and unusual punishment is about criminal sanctions. However, as far as the court's equity powers, it certainly "shocks the conscience" of the judge.

[fishwax]

11. great news, though it's still excessive