Last updated: August 9, 2009 - 1:38pm
It's been a good summer for the major labels' litigators in their battle against individuals charged with copyright infringement. In June, a Minnesota jury awarded the four majors $1.9 million in damages, finding that single mom Jammie Thomas-Rasset had used the peer-to-peer file-sharing network Kazaa to illegally download and share 24 songs. And at the end of July, a federal jury in Boston ordered college student Joel Tenenbaum to pay the majors $675,000 for sharing 30 songs, after hearing evidence that he used at least six different P2P networks for nearly a decade, continuing to infringe even after receiving multiple warnings. But with the defendants challenging the damage awards and likely appealing the verdicts, these cases are far from over. And the courts will now have to confront a difficult and unresolved question in copyright law: Can awards in cases like this be so big that they violate the US Constitution's guarantee of due process?
Links to Sources
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Related
- Third P2P verdict for Jammie Thomas: $1.5 million
- Obama administration defends $222,000 file-sharing verdict
- Judge Slashes 'Monstrous And Shocking' File-Sharing Verdict
- Labels Win Suit Against Song Sharer
- Oracle loses bid for ruling Google use of IP wasn't fair use
- Jury: Google did not infringe Oracle patents with Android
- File Sharing Lawsuits at a Crossroads, After 5 Years of RIAA Litigation
- Apple wins $1 billion victory over Samsung
- TiVo prevails in long-running EchoStar patent case
- Judge to review claims of juror misconduct in Apple-Samsung case
- Apple loses $368 million patent verdict in Texas
- Google infringed on Oracle copyrights, jury finds, but leaves key question unanswered
- Supreme Court declines to hear $675,000 file-swapping case
- Jury Awards $1.17 Billion in Patent Suit
- Apple, Samsung Back in Court
Ratings
Login to rate this headline.

