Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Copyright Law Blogs -> ZeroPaid
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Copyright Law
: ZeroPaidTenenbaum Fined $675,000 for Sharing 30 Works
By DrewWilson
After the judge simply told the jury to decide on a fine, and not asking them to consider the validity of evidence presented by the copyright industry among other things, the Jury found that Tenenbaum be fined $675,000 for sharing 30 songs.
Rewinding a little, during the original trial of Jammie Thomas, Thomas was fined $222,000 for sharing 24 songs. This is $9,250 per work. Here in the Tenenbaum case, a jury fined Tenenbaum $675,000 for sharing 30 works – that’s $22,500 per work. Tenenbaum got fine nearly 2.5 times Thomas’ fine.
With such a huge difference – let alone Thomas’ later fine of $1.92 Million for sharing 24 songs, it immediately raises the question of what kind of measuring stick is being used for infringement. It’s more likely that the fine is little more than guesswork. Added to this, there’s no distinction between commercial infringement and non-commercial infringement in the United States.
The differences in the fine should make it even more clearer that it is critically important that the plaintiff must show actual damages caused, not to mention have a clear-cut foolproof method of actually gathering evidence against someone legally. As the defence has already argued in the Thomas case, given that a song could be bought for just over a dollar, the damages award is stratospheric compared to actual damages – in other words, if 1 download is 1 lost sale, it’s insane to consider any damages above 14 bucks per work. As of yet, the only thing closest to evidence of damage caused was assumptions and guesswork done by the copyright industry.
How is it constitutional that one person could be fined $222,000 while another person, for a very similar act, be fined over 3 times the amount anyway? Given that the awards are purely subjective, it isn’t hard to see just how fishy the whole system is – especially given that this is well in the territory of non-commercial use.
Of course, there are reasons why some outside the US see the whole legal and political system in the US as little more than a servant to the corporate world. Who knows, for some, this may be another sign of this. Either way, the copyright system is bound to draw international scepticism.
Have a tip? Want to contact the author? You can do so by sending a PM via the forums or via e-mail at drew@zeropaid.com.
Full post as published by ZeroPaid on August 01, 2009 (boomark / email).
Comcast Agrees Tentative $16 Million Settlement in Consumer File Sharing Class Action
Comcast Agrees Tentative $16 Million Settlement in Consumer File Sharing Class Action
Undetected Sewage Spill
Prichard Water Works and Sewer Board spends $17 million on upgrades and testing.
Technician Whistleblower
Jury orders DuPont Chambers Works to pay $1.224 million settlement to employee.
California Hospitals
Fined for Shoddy Care
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Lenders Fined
Ryland Group Inc. settles $370,000 questionable lending suit.

Another Twist in the Tenenbaum File Sharing Case
Federal judge finds student liable in music file-sharing case
Missed Opportunity In File Sharing Case Dont Believe It
Fair Use Argument Falls Flat in File Sharing Case
Statutory damages in copyright, and the Tenenbaum case
Download Sharing Creative Works
Recording industry music downloading trial begins
RIAA Seeks Up to $150,000 a Song in File Sharing Trial









