PDA

View Full Version : Boston Student Fined $675k for downloading 30 songs


btarunr
08-03-2009, 08:06 PM
A federal jury on Friday ordered a Boston University graduate student who admitted illegally downloading and sharing music online to pay $675,000 to four record labels.

Joel Tenenbaum, of Providence, R.I., admitted in court that he downloaded and distributed 30 songs. The only issue for the jury to decide was how much in damages to award the record labels.

Under federal law, the recording companies were entitled to $750 to $30,000 per infringement. But the law allows as much as $150,000 per track if the jury finds the infringements were willful. The maximum jurors could have awarded in Tenenbaum's case was $4.5 million.

Jurors ordered Tenenbaum to pay $22,500 for each incident of copyright infringement, effectively finding that his actions were willful. The attorney for the 25-year-old student had asked the jury earlier Friday to "send a message" to the music industry by awarding only minimal damages.

Tenenbaum said he was thankful that the case wasn't in the millions and contrasted the significance of his fine with the maximum.

"That to me sends a message of 'We considered your side with some legitimacy,'" he said. "$4.5 million would have been, 'We don't buy it at all.'"

He added he will file for bankruptcy if the verdict stands.

Tenenbaum's lawyer, Harvard Law School professor Charles Nesson, said the jury's verdict was not fair. He said he plans to appeal the decision because he was not allowed to argue a case based on fair use.

The Recording Industry Association of America issued a statement thanking the jury for recognizing the impact illegal downloading has on the music community.

"We appreciate that Mr. Tenenbaum finally acknowledged that artists and music companies deserve to be paid for their work," the statement said. "From the beginning, that's what this case has been all about. We only wish he had done so sooner rather than lie about his illegal behavior."

Tenenbaum would not say if he regretted downloading music, saying it was a loaded question.

"I don't regret drinking underage in college, even though I got busted a few times," he said.

The case is only the nation's second music downloading case against an individual to go to trial.

Last month, a federal jury in Minneapolis ruled that Jammie Thomas-Rasset, 32, must pay $1.92 million, or $80,000 on each of 24 songs, after concluding she willfully violated the copyrights on those tunes.

The jury began deliberating the case Friday afternoon.

After Tenenbaum admitted Thursday he is liable for damages for 30 songs at issue in the case, U.S. District Judge Nancy Gertner ruled that the jury must consider only whether his copyright infringement was willful and how much in damages to award four recording labels that sued him over the illegal file-sharing.

In his closing statement Friday, Nesson repeatedly referred to Tenenbaum as a "kid" and asked the jury to award only a small amount to the recording companies. At one point, Nesson suggested the damages should be as little as 99 cents per song, roughly the same amount Tenenbaum would have to pay if he legally purchased the music online.

But Tim Reynolds, a lawyer for the recording labels, recounted Tenenbaum's history of file-sharing from 1999 to 2007, describing him as "a hardcore, habitual, long-term infringer who knew what he was doing was wrong." Tenenbaum admitted on the witness stand that he had downloaded and shared more than 800 songs.

Tenenbaum said he downloaded and shared hundreds of songs by Nirvana, Green Day, The Smashing Pumpkins and other artists. The recording industry focused on only 30 songs in the case.

The music industry has typically offered to settle such cases for about $5,000, though it has said that it stopped filing such lawsuits last August and is instead working with Internet service providers to fight the worst offenders. Cases already filed, however, are proceeding to trial.

Tenenbaum testified that he had lied in pretrial depositions when he said his two sisters, friends and others may have been responsible for downloading the songs to his computer.

Under questioning from his own lawyer, Tenenbaum said he now takes responsibility for the illegal swapping.

"I used the computer. I uploaded, I downloaded music ... I did it," Tenenbaum said.

Source (http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20090802/ap_on_hi_te/us_tec_music_downloading).

erocker
08-03-2009, 08:38 PM
Student was fined $674,970 too much. What I find hillarious is that his peers (jury) set the fine. Society is dumb or are getting a kickback from the RIAA.

dr emulator (madmax)
08-04-2009, 12:08 AM
Student was fined $674,970 too much. What I find hillarious is that his peers (jury) set the fine. Society is dumb or are getting a kickback from the RIAA. i agree and say yet again how the f*** do they expect him to pay it's so blo*** ludacrisly high .unyet in the uk a chinese dodgy gang gets caught pirating 1000's of dvds of the latest films and noone cares what the hell? why don't they fine them millions ?argh i could run around screaming sometimes at the bullsh** that keeps happening:eek:

DanTheBanjoman
08-04-2009, 08:35 AM
I'm gonna make some extremely crappy music, "leak" it on the interwebz and then sue everyone who downloads.

FordGT90Concept
08-04-2009, 08:53 AM
Society is dumb or are getting a kickback from the RIAA.
I say both.

DanishDevil
08-04-2009, 07:01 PM
Kid at my school had the same thing happen to him, and my school helped the prosecutors. Crap like that forced me to get a Zune Pass, but when you're working and still partially dependant on financial aid and a little money from your parents, it's feasible.

That kid's life is ruined, even if he gets out of paying every penny. Why don't they go after the ones who are getting tens upon thousands of songs every month instead of a kid that got 30? It's not going to set an example out of him. He doesn't deserve it. Dumbasses.

FordGT90Concept
08-04-2009, 07:05 PM
That kid's life is ruined, even if he gets out of paying every penny. Why don't they go after the ones who are getting tens upon thousands of songs every month instead of a kid that got 30? It's not going to set an example out of him. He doesn't deserve it. Dumbasses.
I very much agree. I hope, for his sake, he appeals, and appeals, and appeals. He can claim he's poor so the court will wave the fines. That fine is obscene for the crime.


$22,500 or $80,000 per song...they only cost $1 retail including delivery. It has no equal, really. You'd be better off robbing a bank (and maybe that's where these cases eventually end up).


Morale of the story: being honest is a bad thing.

DanishDevil
08-04-2009, 08:27 PM
Morale of the story: being honest is a bad thing.

I wouldn't go that far.

FordGT90Concept
08-04-2009, 08:56 PM
Most of these cases never get to court because they argue they didn't do anything wrong. In pretty much every case where a fine was issued, the plea was guilty (or an indirect admission of guilt like "it wasn't me, it was someone else at the house"). Plead not guilty (even though it is hard not to be), the RIAA usually doesn't bother to pursue the case because it would cost more than it would yield in a settlement/victory. Plead guilty, and you're looking at hundreds of thousands, if not millions, in fines.


Getting one person to plead guilty means milking a cash cow for them. Think of it like Nigeria scams. They keep threatening people until they get a nibble. These nibbles are only 20-30 songs but the law fines is based on infringements, not subject allowing them to net huge gains on those few songs. Most the people that distribute tens of thousands of songs are smart enough to not bite the bait--they delete those scam emails like they didn't even they received it. Just like Nigeria scams, if there are no nibbles, there is no profit in prosecuting/tricking people.


The lawyer was spot on with his statement to the jury to go easy on him and not to encourage the RIAA. The jury didn't care.