Profs protest massive P2P damage awards

A new academic paper argues that statutory damages have spiraled out of control, especially in P2P cases, and that reform or abolition is necessary.

Statutory damages in the US can be claimed by copyright holders in lieu of actual damages, and they range from $750 to $30,000 per infringement (or up to $150,000 when the infringement is "willful"). These huge ranges, and the lack of useful guidance on how to implement them, have led to both wildly inconsistent damage awards and huge penalties for small crimes. Here's how two leading copyright professors sum up the problem, drawing on the Jammie Thomas P2P case in Minnesota:

Actual damages in the Thomas case were arguably about $50. Given the defendant’s lack of innocence, the jury had no choice but to award Capitol Records at least $750 per infringed work (which would have totaled $18,000). Some jurors were so outraged by Thomas’ conduct that they wanted to award Capitol Records $3.6 million for this infringement.

Recent rulings have "exacerbated the potential for excessive and arbitrary awards when skillful lawyers are able to persuade juries to become outraged about infringing conduct."

So how do we fix the system? Pam Samuelson and Tara Wheatland, both of the University of California, Berkeley, have some suggestions.

First, though, they provide a thorough recap of the statutory damages provision in US copyright law, currently ensconced in section 504(c) of the US copyright code. The law gives little guidance about application, and "as a result, awards of statutory damages are frequently arbitrary, inconsistent, unprincipled, and sometimes grossly excessive."

The authors aren't opposed to the idea of statutory damages, which were designed to provide relief in cases where it was quite difficult to quantify the actual losses suffered by the copyright holder. They also don't object to using statutory damages in a punitive fashion. "Awards are sometimes quite modest in close cases," they write, "approximate actual damages in other cases, or are enhanced by modest amounts (e.g., 2 or 3 times actual damages) in somewhat egregious cases and somewhat more (e.g., 8 to 10 times actual damages) in more egregious infringement cases."

Damages vs. actual damage

But ending up on the hook for up to $150,000 just for swapping a single song on a file-sharing network? Craziness—and far too likely to be used against regular people. "In today’s world, where the average person in her day-to-day life interacts with many copyrighted works in a way that may implicate copyright law," says the paper, "the dangers posed by the lack of meaningful constraints on statutory damage awards are particularly acute."

The Jammie Thomas case, in which Thomas was fined $222,000 by a jury for uploading a few dozen songs, stands out as an example. In that particular case, the authors argue, "jury instructions should have asked the jury to consider more carefully the relative reprehensibility of Thomas’s conduct and the reasonableness of the ratio of harm that this defendant caused these plaintiffs to a proper award aimed at deterring and punishing her, but no more." (The $222,000 verdict was thrown out over one of these jury instructions, in fact, and the case is currently moving toward a retrial this summer.)

And, a service that ripped nearly 5,000 CDs, put the results on its servers, and offered them over the Internet to users who had already purchased copies on CD, had to pay $118 million, based on statutory damages of $25,000 per disc. The verdict came down "despite the absence of any evidence of actual harm to the plaintiffs or profits to the defendant," and is another example of how being the target of a single copyright infringement lawsuit can now endanger the livelihoods of both individuals and businesses.

The authors provide pages of suggestions for reforming the system, privileging awards that are small multiples of damages suffered. They also argue for more judicial discretion in one direction: down. "We also think courts should have the power to lower statutory damage awards below the $750 minimum in the current statute when an award based on this minimum would be grossly disproportionate to the harm caused," they write, "as in the p2p file-sharing cases."

Finally, when Congress eventually turns to overhaul copyright law again, Samuelson and Wheatland have a final suggestion. "Congress might even want to reconsider whether statutory damages are serving a truly useful purpose in copyright law, given that the rules of evidence about proof of damages and profits are much less rigorous now than they were when statutory damages were first created and given how few other countries have statutory damage regimes."

Source: ars technica

Tags: MP3, P2P

Add comment

Your name:
Sign in with:
Your comment:

Enter code:

E-mail (not required)
E-mail will not be disclosed to the third party

Last news

Galaxy Note10 really is built around a 6.7-inch display
You may still be able to download your content
Facebook, Messenger and Instagram are all going away
Minimize apps to a floating, always-on-top bubble
Japan Display has been providing LCDs for the iPhone XR, the only LCD model in Apple’s 2018 line-up
The 2001 operating system has reached its lowest share level
The entire TSMC 5nm design infrastructure is available now from TSMC
The smartphone uses a Snapdragon 660 processor running Android 9 Pie
The Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017) Review
The evolution of the successful smartphone, now with a waterproof body and USB Type-C
February 7, 2017 / 2
Samsung Galaxy TabPro S - a tablet with the Windows-keyboard
The first Windows-tablet with the 12-inch display Super AMOLED
June 7, 2016 /
Keyboards for iOS
Ten iOS keyboards review
July 18, 2015 /
Samsung E1200 Mobile Phone Review
A cheap phone with a good screen
March 8, 2015 / 4
Creative Sound Blaster Z sound card review
Good sound for those who are not satisfied with the onboard solution
September 25, 2014 / 2
Samsung Galaxy Gear: Smartwatch at High Price
The first smartwatch from Samsung - almost a smartphone with a small body
December 19, 2013 /

News Archive



Do you use microSD card with your phone?
or leave your own version in comments (15)