TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Judge Slams RIAA, $675k Fine Ruled Unconstitutional

Another break happened today in the RIAA’s case against Boston University student Joel Tenenbaum, as the $675k fine was reduced by 90%. The judge in the case criticised the RIAA and held that the jury’s damages were unconstitutional. Even the reduced fine is described as “severe, even harsh” by the District Judge.

In the US there have been two major file-sharing cases against individuals that have gone to trial. In both cases the RIAA was initially awarded hundreds and thousands of dollars in damages, but in both cases these were slashed on appeal.

In the RIAA’s case against Jamie Thomas, the jury-awarded damages were reduced significantly as the excessive damages were ruled to be unconstitutional. Today, the same thing has happened with the case against Boston University student Joel Tenenbaum.

The ruling issued by District Judge Nancy Gertner states that the constitutional issues are clear, and that attempting to avoid the constitutional challenges (that the damages are excessive in proportion to the crime) by reducing the damages would be the best way to handle these.

The verdict comes as no surprise to many, and may even come as a relief to the RIAA, who have faced some negative publicity over the damages awarded. It’s unclear, though, if this modification will stand, as the RIAA will have to accept it. If they don’t, a retrial will be called.

Judge Gertner finds a retrial likely, stating in the judgment: “The plaintiffs in this case, however, made it abundantly clear that they were, to put it mildly, going for broke. They stated in open court that they likely would not accept a remitted award.”

“The Constitution protects not only criminal defendants from the imposition of ‘cruel and unusual punishments’, but also civil defendants facing arbitrarily high punitive awards,” Gertner added.

The meat of the subject can be found on page 6, though.

I reduce the jury’s award to $2,250 per infringed work, three times the statutory minimum, for a total award of $67,500. Significantly, this amount is more than I might have awarded in my independent judgment. But the task of determining the appropriate damages award in this case fell to the jury, not the Court. I have merely reduced the award to the greatest amount that the Constitution will permit given the facts of this case.

There is no question that this reduced award is still severe, even harsh. 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 incurring substantial damages awards. Tenenbaum’s behavior, after all, was hardly exemplary. The jury found that he not only violated the law, but did so willfully.

Reducing the jury’s $675,000 award, however, also sends another no less important message: The Due Process Clause does not merely protect large corporations, like BMW and State Farm, from grossly excessive punitive awards. It also protects ordinary people like Joel Tenenbaum

This judgment relieves some of the PR pressure around the RIAA. While they were clearly happy with the height of the damages, hoping it would intimidate filesharers, it also became a rallying cry for others. The reduced damages proposed by Judge Gertner may silence the opposition to some extent, and reduce the impact of campaigns.

Joel Tenenbaum was somewhat relieved upon hearing the verdict. In a telephone interview with the Boston Globe he said: “Obviously, it’s better news than it could have been. But it’s basically equally unpayable to me.”

Even if he could pay it, none of the money – be it $675,000, or $67,500 – would find its way into the pockets of the artists whose songs were involved. The RIAA told TorrentFreak that the damages will be used to fund new anti-piracy campaigns instead.

Whether or not there will be a retrial, the current verdict is a blow to their anti-piracy campaigns, while the Constitutional concern may preclude any further strengthening of copyright laws and punishments in the near future.

Breaking story…

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • N/A

    Excellent!

  • A me

    Glad to see that even in the US some judges have a brain.

    Too bad he couldn’t reduce it more, especially since none of the money is going to the artists it “hurt”. Oh wait thats cause it didn’t.

  • Rob

    Nice

  • Anonymous

    That’s still a lot of money, but over half a million dollars? Finally someone saw how ridiculous that was.

  • Joooosh

    This is a great ruling (Even though the fine is still hefty). It’s nice to see that one judge in the U.S. still respects the Constitution and isn’t a total moron!!

  • Anthony

    Great article, but I’ve got another story TF might wanna pickup on:

    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100708/02510310122.shtml

    Shows some of the BS that the publishers do to hide their profits, moving money around behind the scenes in order to fabricate massive losses and avoid paying what they owe to other parties that invested into the project. The level of greed and hypocrisy is absolutely astounding.

  • theddlera

    fine is still stupidly expensive – I think people should be fined for the price they could have bought it for. that way they wouldnt sue small time downloaders as it wouldnt be worth the effort.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Judge Slams RIAA, $675k Fine Ruled Unconstitutional | TorrentFreak -- Topsy.com

  • SomeGuy

    No way!

    The judge must have been bribed by tenenbaum!!!!

    Guys, get these corrupt judges out of the legal system, why are they doing this????

    I lol at everytime I see one of these posts.

    Carry on TF.

  • KsbjA

    If anybody believes, after all this, that the RIAA are the “good guys”, then I certainly don’t want to have much to do with them. I really hate large companies squeezing money out of moderately wealthy people (many, if not most of the “illegal” downloaders could be described this way)! They get kind of a sick enjoyment from spoiling the lives of the fans of their clients. The “Screwing artists and consumers since 1952″ tagline is really appropriate.

    Oh, and last but not least – pros to the judge!

  • TheSpark

    Shame on the RIAA, just shame. Going after college students who actually helped you earn a profit by downloading and sharing your music, then destroying that students life…. Makes me sick.

    I don’t rank the RIAA much higher than al qaeda, taliban, or any other terrorists organization.

    In fact, that is all the RIAA, MPAA, IFPI, and others have become: Terrorists with extortion and fear being their main goals.

  • Anonymous

    Good to know that there are some judges in this cruel world are not complete morons.

  • anonymous

    with RIAA openly saying that the fine awarded will go towards funding new anti piracy campaigns, why didnt the judge insist that it went to the artists? or better still, throw the case out for filing the prosecution under false pretences? after all, the reason given for pursuing these cases is the money the artists are losing. basically, it proves the whole bloody issue is a complete sham!

  • Anonymous

    “Even if he could pay it, none of the money – be it $675,000, or $67,500 – would find its way into the pockets of the artists whose songs were involved.”

    That just says it all, doesn’t it?

    The RIAA sues Joel Tenenbaum on behalf of all the poor artists, and then… Takes the money for itself and gives said poor artists absolutely nothing.

    Wow. And to think certain crazy people call the RIAA a selfish parasite… How dare they.

  • MPAA = FAIL

    So they reduced the fine to only $2500 per track, how generous…
    I just downloaded Pendulums new album, so by the reduced sentence, i would only have to pay $37500 for the album, well that doesn’t seem absolutely insane at all.

    Is it just me or does it seem that the world’s governments run by monkeys or something?

  • open source

    After much research I have written “The Free Software Guide”
    Get it here: http://plunder.com/1bd4852dab
    I have made this guide in order to support file-sharing.
    It covers UseNet’s on page 12 and file-sharing in general since torrents may not be the only solution.
    I would love if you could give me some feedback on it.

  • X

    $2250 per song… and that’s only because a judge could see how extreme the legal “punitive damages” extortion was in this case.

    These “punitive damages” don’t really deter people, they just make it so corporations can ruin individuals’ lives in a misguided attempt to make an example of someone.

    Even though this is relatively good news (relative to the severity of the surreal damages being claimed originally) it doesn’t reduce, even in the slightest, the scheme that the RIAA had tried to pull in this instance… to ruin someone’s life over sharing 30 f**king lousy songs.

    Although slightly relieved for Joel… I’m no less pissed off with the RIAA… from their price-fixing days, undeserved influence over politicians (bribery through campaign contributions) and their efforts to viciously attack consumers and try to ruin lives over petty civil offenses is a disgrace, behavior only expected from utter SCUM.

    F**k the RIAA, f**k ‘em until their corrupt asses and obselete business model are a thing of the past!

  • Gargamel

    Doesn’t matter that poor guy is still stuck paying 67k.

  • Anonymous

    how is this positive, yes the fine was reduced but he still has to pay $67500 a real result would be if the ammount was reduced to $675

  • mercuryR

    Well overall its a decent judgement, though I think we can all agree it is still a judgement that was corrupt from the beginning and has not been rectified in a proper manner.

    The judgements in so many cases are corrupt and need looking at again. The false amounts of damages incurred by these companies are continually fabricated and in many cases completely unlawful.

    The problem is so many mainstream people are still been lied to about what it costs the industries and also have this attitude that what we do is totally illegal but refuse to accept that these companies are acting completely immoral and in many cases illegally.

  • Dano

    ‘But the task of determining the appropriate damages award in this case fell to the jury’

    This kinda conforms that the jury system doesn’t produce fair results. If you allow the jury to decide the verdict of the case you basically get a who bunch of ill informed people, making a judgment on something they don’t know anything about.

    I was once on the jury of a case where a guy burned his wife with petrol.
    The jury was given the task of deciding if the guy actually burned his wife on purpose or not.

    Basically to my understanding this guy was a dumb f**k because he tipped petrol on his wife two times at two different occasions. But the second time he did it he set his wife on fire.

    This was because he was a dumb f**k like i said (couldn’t even speak properly) for standing close to his wife with a lighter, flicking it, not realizing how flammable petrol is.
    The fumes that petrol produces are extremely flammable and once he sparked the lighter, he set fire to the fumes which traveled to his wife, burning her.

    I’m not saying that he was innocent but the task of the jury was to decide whether he did it on purpose or not, if he did do it on purpose, the sentence was much higher.

    But when the jury decided nobody felt the same as me and were swayed by one of the jurors that was the loudest. They pretty much decided that if he pored petrol on her, he deserved the full sentence.

    Again i want to say that he does deserve to go to prison but the jury didn’t do there job, they took the law into there own hands. And this was allowed to happen because the jury wasn’t supervised and there discussions were private so whatever was said, was never heard by the judge, it was private.

    Thanks for reading, that turned into a story lol

  • mercuryR

    Well if it was to be a decent judgement then they would not have charged the guy in the first place but under current circumstances it is a decent start on things.

    Recently things have been going more the way of the pirates (especially in the UK and many other European countries).

    Fuck the US as they have become nothing but greedy power hungry morons that are completely detached from the situation in hand.

  • wtfgov?

    wow… this also points out one more thing… the jury was willing to award 675,000 for the amount of music that could fill an ipod

    wat kind of hypocrisy is this? i bet half of those hypocrits on the jury at the very least run frostwire or limewire (how i got started filesharing, lol), becuase they dont wanna pay for music, and a best buy rep told them that this is “legit” filesharing… i mean, seriously…

  • wtfgov?

    edit… i meant enough music to fill a cd, not an ipod… just a freaking cd and the jury awards 675,000, i mean wtf

    STOP PIRACY… DONT BUY FROM THOSE HOLLYWOOOD PIRATE SHITHEADS

  • Anonymous

    If I was Joel I will appeal again until I reach the supreme court costing the corporation of parasites as much money as possible then I will BK.

    No money for the parasites! Not even one penny! Hahahahahahahaha!

    …………………./´¯/)
    ………………..,/¯../
    ………………./…./
    …………./´¯/’…’/´¯¯`·¸
    ………./’/…/…./……./¨¯\
    ……..(’(…´…´…. ¯~/’…’)
    ………\……………..’…../
    ……….”…\………. _.·´
    …………\…………..(
    …………..\………….\…

  • fej

    Love the logo

  • Dano

    @ wtfgov. Exactly mate, I agree with you completely.

    Im starting to think the reason why the jury awarded the 675k amount was most likely because they didn’t even know what the damages would eventually be, or they were just asked to vote the pirate guilty or not without any idea of the consequences. Or they were given no choice but to award that much.

    I don’t think the jury had control of the fine amount and were probably not even told what the damages could have been.

    Im basically saying that the RIAA knows how to use the legal system and the legal system’s incredibly flawed.
    And as we are so useless as a species, it will probably never be reformed in an intelligent way. Its just sad.

  • Anonymous

    The damage to the reputation of the US and it’s economic consequences are incalculable.

    USA really needed this after the tortures and the proof that the US government can not even follow it’s own laws.

  • John

    If you allow the jury to decide the verdict of the case you basically get a who bunch of ill informed people, making a judgment on something they don’t know anything about.

    Sounds a lot like our government voting for the Digital Economy Bill.

    Actually, it just sounds a lot like our government in general…

    The really sick bit about this story is that the judge lowered the amount payable by the ‘maximum amount allowed’ – a 10th.

    In other words, if the RIAA had said “We want you to pay 1 Billion Dollars” and a judge OK’d it, then it went to appeal and was proven to be totally batshit mad, the guy would still have to pay 100 million dollars.

    That, my friends, is not justice.

  • Anonymous

    @Some moron:

    “No way!

    The judge must have been bribed by tenenbaum!!!!”

    Obviously the judge was bribed by the entertainment of parasites.

  • wtfgov?

    ehh, since its america, they are presented w/ all details about the ruling, then the judge adjusts if necessary

    the tru american ideal of jury by ones peers is to remove hypocrisy, and make a judges job virtually unessential… a judge is only necessar after the jury f*cks up

  • Anonymous

    “how is this positive, yes the fine was reduced but he still has to pay $67500 a real result would be if the ammount was reduced to $675″

    If I was Joel I would still not have pay even $675, not even 1c!

  • Dimitri K

    Even $67,500 is a ridiculous amount. $6,750 would still be an unreasonable penalty for someone who happened to share some music files.

    ‘Justice,’ apparently, is little more than legal thuggery. Now that’s the real crime here, a straight-up abuse of power.

    Give them all the finger, Joel, as they deserve nothing more.

  • Dano

    @ wtfgov.. So the jury did know the amount of the damages? so why then did they allow such a harsh decision?

    I really want to know now, how was the RIAA allowed to sue for $675,000. Why didn’t anyone during the case tell the court that the damages were insane.

    Simply said, how did the legal system fail to review and lower the sentence to say $50-$100? The actual ‘value’ of the tracks…

  • LOLmack

    $6,750 for a song. The judge still has f-d up morals and her math sucks.

  • wtfgov?

    b/c hollywood runs america… simply enough

    barack obama won the presidency thru money from lobbyists, and through the support of almost all major news networks(up to the reader to decide if hes done a good job, not starting a political debate in a tech thread, we got more important things)

    americans voted on him, because their favorite celebrities went on air and told them too

    and in america, more often than not, the average person will b more moved by jack black’s “dont b a douche, stop piracy” video, than will be moved by hard facts

  • Dano

    wtfgov?
    So your basically saying that the greedy and powerful run the world. And that the majority of people are easily manipulated conformists with out a brain? lol
    That sounds about right to me

    PS and yeah obama was elected because off the unfair media coverage but he also got a lot of funding from the banks. More infact that anyone else running for president…

  • Anonymous

    Would be better if he had gotten $0 but that’s unlikely

    still a great win for us

  • Anonymous

    @ Anonymous

    Its not a great win for us at all. They still got fined $67,000 and the judge couldn’t lower that amount anymore.

    Nothings changed from this ruling, in the next case the fine will still be unreasonable and the judge will still only be able to lower it to $2500 per track. And who says they wont just go along with the full amount next time.

    The only ‘great news’ is that this information is shared on the net so people can see whats going on. Nothing more

  • Joe Biden

    Another threat to National security, quashed.

  • Kaptain Krunch

    This is funny because the people who get sued are people who can’t afford the ridiculous prices of entertainment because commerce pays them a meagerly minimum wage that just covers basic needs.

  • Doink

    thats friggin bullshit.

  • Truther

    If the judge found the reduced penalty still “severe, even harsh” then he should have completely eliminated the charges.

  • fs
  • theo Jordan

    oh wow, its about time the kangaroo courts stood up! amazing. Its about time.

    privacy-tools.es.tc

  • Lakawak

    IT is just amazing this fantasy world that torrentfreak’s writers live in. This judge did not slam the RIAA at all.

  • QuadSlacker1313

    The only answer is to share more files.

    Share 20,000 copyrighted files, at $2500 a piece, that works out to $50,000,000. Share 100,000 copyrighted files, and what will they do, send you a subpoena threatening you with a quarter of a billion dollars in charges? I would love to be the recipient of that letter.

    “I’ll be judge, I’ll be jury,” said cunning old Fury: “I’ll try the whole cause, and condemn you to death.”

  • fuckdat

    Why not convert the sentence to community service when the money doesn’t end up in the artists hands anyway? I’m willing to bet the RIAA wouldn’t be so eager to sue everyone they can. Might speed up the judicial process a bit for other cases as well, cases that are important.

  • david

    42 Jul 10, 2010 at 02:42 by Truther wrote:

    If the judge found the reduced penalty still “severe, even harsh” then he should have completely eliminated the charges.

    he can’t because he is bound by the law. only political parties can change the law. and it will not happen I am afraid.

  • Schnitt

    So really what happens to this guy if he simply refuses to pay?

    Wage garnish: you can get around that by working under the table or leaving the country

    Bankruptcy: rebuild your life and credit in 5-7 years.

    I can only see these two options since this is not a criminal case

    Anyone else want to chime in

  • wtfgov?

    who the fuck is RIAA, and what gives them the right to sue copyright laws?

    they are not isp, the label for the artist, or the artist, and the money did not help any…

    thats it, im going to sue some random person in wisconsin, because they wronged some other random person in china, and im going to use all the money for myself…

  • Black Swan Social Media, Inc.

    A law-firm that goes to bat for file-sharers and operates solely through public donations. Two, three, five bucks from a few thousand of file-sharers each month, a small portion of which goes towards paying the lawyers while the rest gets “gifted” to the Defendant in the amount of whatever the final ruling requires.

    All we’re saying is think about it.

  • neostyles

    Im all for fair reparations but such enormously exxagerated fines don’t help to detract from the RIAA’s “big evil corporation” image.

    If it were up to me, I would charge $40 per infringement.

  • Anonymous

    Take it to the supreme court Joe! Keep fighting the good fight.

  • Leigh

    “Even if he could pay it, none of the money – be it $675,000, or $67,500 – would find its way into the pockets of the artists whose songs were involved. The RIAA told TorrentFreak that the damages will be used to fund new anti-piracy campaigns instead.”

    Man, that’s just a kick in the stomach…
    So they are pursuing new business models, except their business is to protect their old, outdated model. Right…

  • Danny

    IN YOUR FACE RIAA :)

    http://www.hotne.ws

  • StevO

    Im telling you, we are not going to be called “pirates” for much longer. We are internet Terrorists.That will make jurys even more angry. If they used the words “file-sharer” then they dont sound as harsh. But NOOO they want to make the PIRATE sound mean and nasty. I would like to go into court if I were on trial and give everyone an oreo cookie and say, there I shared with you, now did that seem illegal to you?

  • anonymous

    You know something that would be cool. if some of the big torrent sites (the pirate bay) made a little donation thing on their front page. The Pirate Bay get over a million hits a day, so imagine if only a tiny amount of those people gave a dollar each. Then his whole fine would be paid off. that would be awesome

  • unbelievable!

    asking for donations to support stealing media… hmm

    none of this legal nonsense would exist if people paid for their on-line music, movies, e-books and supported the arts and didnt support themselves getting free product

    very greedy of freeloaders really

  • me

    Looks like the US Constitution was written in a time of political sanity, long before that country turned into mindless and ruthless corporatism. That’s fantastic and great news.

    However, the cynic in me expects a MAFIAA-Protection-Amendment to the Constitution soon, so that those exorbitant punitive damages remain in place and can’t be challenged. They are just too many corrupt Congresspeople and Senators there for this NOT to happen.

    Just wait and see.

  • AnarchyNow

    What about a “law” that nobody but a bunch of billionaires forced and a bunch of corrupted politician passed but no-one else wants and nobody follows?
    What about “democracy”, the government of people by people for people, not a government of billionaires by billionaires for billionaires?
    Ah well the U$A never were a democracy at any time in their short blinded bloody history.
    Joel Tenenbaum has done nothing wrong, nothing that millions and millions of Internet users are doing every day.
    Do the MAFIAA except anybody to pity them? They made billions & billions out of thin air “selling” shitty propaganda more than music & movies.
    Internet “Piracy” is indeed covered by the 1st amendment since it’s just the choice of not having to pay for a bunch of noises/lights if we don’t want to.
    DMCA is a clear violation of the 1st amendment btw, so is the censorship of some arbitrary words on tv/music-games/websites/forums/etc, especially when forced unto people not in the U$A while the whole world knows what “fuck” and “shit” and “faggot” mean.

  • X

    @unbelievable! .. No, he’s talking about donations to pay off an an excessive, surreal and extortionate fine. (which don’t deserve to be paid anyway but that’s another issue)

    An extortionate fine only made possible by America’s court systems favoring corporations over citizens due to undeserved influence (including campaign funding bribery) of policymakers – something clearly demonstrated by the “punitive damages” bullshit.

    Bitch at freeloaders all you want, they simply know what the RIAA provides (an overpriced duplication service and a middle-man scheme that screws over consumers and artists alike) and how valueless mass-marketed, over-hyped, cookie-cutter content is in the modern world.

    If profitability of recorded music disappeared tomorrow, only real artists would be making music… wouldn’t that be terrible?

  • Brandon

    That is fucking retarded!!! Throw out these old fucking judges that don’t know whats doing on. Charge tenenbaum the fee crappy itunes charges. 30 crappy songs at .99 cents a piece will be about 30-50 bucks and ahole RIAA spent how many thousands of bucks for their gay attorneys. The bitches still lose. He ain’t gonna pay a penny and the stuff he dl WASN’T even worth dl’ing.

    Stupid doucheebaggeess…..8-P

  • Brandon

    Awaiting moderation aholes…

  • Brandon

    sad when EVEN your comments are moderated on freaking torrentfreak. Guess they have to ok it with the mafiaa… Bitches…

  • Anonymous

    @ Brandon
    Comments are moderated at torrent-freak to stop people spamming website addresses. And a few other reasons, just look at the bottom of this page. They even tell you they moderate.

    And then you say ‘Guess they have to ok it with the mafiaa’ Where did you get that idea from?? you guessed…

    TF ‘Please be advised we will not tolerate off topic posts, spam, trolls or personal attacks. Please help us to help you by NOT responding to such posts. ALL posts which fall into this category will be removed, including those responding to such posts.’

  • me

    #59 X: “An extortionate fine only made possible by America’s court systems favoring corporations over citizens due to undeserved influence (including campaign funding bribery) of policymakers – something clearly demonstrated by the “punitive damages” bullshit.”

    Actually, it’s not the court system itself (judicial branch) that is favoring corporations, it’s Congress and Senate (legislative branch), aided by the executive branch (FBI etc…).

    The problem runs deeper though: the legislative branch could only enact such corporate monstrosities because the people failed to vigorously oppose them — either by protests on the streets and/or by voting other candidates.

    It’s a social problem (voters’ apathy), not (just) a systemic problem.

  • Karolis

    They are still fucking him hardly even with reduced cost.. I’d give them nothing.

  • Anonymous

    Kent Brockman

    “I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Democracy simply doesn’t work”.

  • Umm

    $67.50 is a more reasonable settlement

  • Pingback: Judge Slams RIAA, $675k Fine Ruled Unconstitutional - 6460

  • BIOS

    If any of this money went to the artists, I would actually be fine with it. While even the reduced amount is still completely unpayable, it would have at least been for the right cause. This BS where the people who didn’t create the content can take legal action against the people who steal it is getting completely out of hand (if not already out of hand).

    What would it take to absolutely remove the RIAA from Media as a whole? I know all the shitty music of today is pumped out by the RIAA, but with the advent (well, more like continued use) of bit torrent and p2p in general, Artists can get all of their music out there and just set up a fkin paypal for donations. Even if the artist just has a website, I would be more inclined to download the lossless or even 320 or their latest album for a good $5.

    Everyone is always complaining and not doing anything about these types of issues. I am glad to see that the ISPs are taking a stand though :)

  • ffd

    #65
    But TF can tolerate neo-nazi-style and retardedmind’s spam. That’s not fair!

  • Pingback: Judge Slams RIAA, $675k Fine Ruled Unconstitutional | Systema

  • entertainment industry fails

    Honestly, I barley even pirate anymore… I started pirating because i was sick of paying ridiculous amounts for stuff I ended up hating. Just because I didn’t wanna get stuck with a movie/cd/game that I watched/listened to played for like 15 minutes and decided I hated it. Paying $60 for a game and playing it for 15 minutes SUCKS.

    However, it has now literally reached the point where I don’t even bother stealing this garbage anymore. As far as mainstream music/movies/games, whats the point. Its all just trash.

  • Pingback: Judge Slams RIAA, $675k Fine Ruled Unconstitutional

  • name

    It’s moving in the right direction, but even the reduced amount is absurd. The damages should be the price to buy those songs on cd or itunes.

  • Pingback: Judge Slams RIAA, $675k Fine Ruled Unconstitutional

  • kevin

    posted this story to pikk – Fair or Foul? Judge reduces piracy damages to $67,000 – is it fair now? [POLL] – http://www.pikk.com/49538

  • Pingback: === popurls.com === popular today

  • Anonymous

    We are not the criminals, the Riaa are they are basically extorting innocent people.If I was him I would go straight out of the country and go to Europe

  • abolishcopyrightnow

    Civil cases are about making the defendant pay the plaintiff for actual damages and not these large punitive damages. The plaintiff cannot prove any actual damages. The judge states there was “relatively minor harm”.

    In the end the judicial system is totally embarrassed by these unjust tyrannical copyright laws.

    I hope the judge’s reputation is destroyed for the tyrannical damage award.

  • Banzai Bri

    Hurt the artists?? Whatever, obviously it doesnt hurt Trent Reznor or Radiohead, since they put their albums free online for everyone. And as soon as my band gets a record deal feel free to download and share as much as you want.

  • Anonymous

    “I just downloaded Pendulums new album, so by the reduced sentence, i would only have to pay $37500 for the album…”

    That has got to be the most idiotic reasoning. Its like saying that if you stole some money, your only punishment should be to pay back the exact amount you stole. The completely flies in the face of the notion of punishment.

  • abolishcopyrightnow

    “I just downloaded Pendulums new album, so by the reduced sentence, i would only have to pay $37500 for the album…”

    This is an example showing how unjust the reduced damage award is because civil damage awards should be for actual damages.

    In reality the plaintiff cannot prove any actual damages and does not deserve any compensation.

    What is wrong are the large punitive statutory damages in copyright law that are driven by tyranny and the infinite greed of the plaintiff.

  • Antony Hopkins

    Who cares :) Joel will not give a penny to these scumbags of the RIAA.

    Don’t buy CDs or DVDs. Don’t support scumbags. Supporting scumbags makes you a scumbag.

  • dopey

    are they goin after people that are downloading movies and tv shows?

  • Stinker

    OMG you dumb americans have to sue eachother for everything. Why don’t you just blow the fucking RIAA hq up with one of your nuclear warhead.

    RIAA & BSA 2 criminal scum companies which must be stopped!

  • RIAAAABOSSS

    FUCK THE DIRT RIA

    SCUMS ALWAYS FIND EACHOTHER>>>
    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100604/1229329692.shtml

  • Anonymous

    @68

    “I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Democracy simply doesn’t work”.

    Yes it work once all the parasites has been eliminated.

  • Ninja

    “The RIAA told TorrentFreak that the damages will be used to fund new anti-piracy campaigns instead.”

    That pretty much ruin any argument RIAA throws at the lawsuits lol.

    One of MAFIAA’s weapons is misinformation and fake data. Unfortunately, a jury is composed by regular Joes that don’t have much of a clue of what is happening. A well paid lawyer can brainwash them into obedient puppets in most cases regarding complex issues such as tech related and even the petrol case that demanded more attention to the guy than to any lawyer blabbing.

    Oh well, good setback for MAFIAA. Hope both guys can carry on with their lives. And keep sharing =)

  • wew

    #78 what punishment do you crave – hand-cuffs, bondage, whips? Fag?

  • Pingback: newmeta.com

  • Brudda

    This is great news! Why?
    Because it keeps the evil-corporate image of the RIAA in people’s minds. Also, it helps to educate and enlighten the older members of our society that file sharing exists and it’s relatively easy to do. “You mean I can download Apocalypse Now, or the Rolling Stones, or my favorite episode of Kojak for free? No way!” (yes way!)
    Hopefully, it will bring some converts into the fold…

  • IamOKAW

    “Even if he could pay it, none of the money – be it $675,000, or $67,500 – would find its way into the pockets of the artists whose songs were involved. The RIAA told TorrentFreak that the damages will be used to fund new anti-piracy campaigns instead.”

    That is priceless. All those BS guilt-trip adds about how piracy takes food off the tables of hard-working people in the entertainment industry. So why aren’t these judgement going to the poor, starving entertainers?

  • Daniel

    You know what’s funny… After all these years of having to pay top dollar for software, music and movies; we’ve downloaded thousands of things and gotten away with it. If they DO end up putting a stop to all piracy (which will happen in a million years), the amount of damage we’ve done so far is just awesomeness. They’ve lost so much money and it’s so funny. I’ll download software and music I’ll never use or listen too, just to show maximum disrespect. Support the artist’s you say? What, so they can pay off their 4 story mansion? Please…

  • Pingback: Coffee - Why is my son so scared of everything? - Grinders

  • CDXX

    If I were him, I would pay them. In monthly installments of one dollar. And right before I sent it, I would “run out” of toilet paper…

  • Pingback: Global Geek News Podcast #73

  • Pingback: The Power Geeks #58 - ThePowerGeeks.com

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

  • Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

    Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation is a network mechanism through which many Internet subscribers can share the...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.