We endeavor in this month’s column to shed some light upon two recent jury verdicts in Minnesota and Massachusetts that have generated considerable heat at the intersection of copyright and the Internet. Unfortunately for the peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing defendants, different “peers” sat on the federal district court juries that awarded the record company plaintiffs statutory damages of $1.92 million and $675,000 for willful infringement of multiple sound recording copyrights. The size of these verdicts, the impecunious status of the defendants (a single mother and a student), and the “non-commercial” nature of their activities, have generated substantial controversy.
In the Minnesota action, after the second jury trial, a motion for a new trial is pending before the judge who expressed great concern about the size of a much smaller jury award, in the first trial, that was vacated on other grounds. Among the objections raised to the verdicts, both in the press and new trial motion, is a Due Process Clause constitutional challenge to the statutory damages provision of the Copyright Act. The U.S. Justice Department has joined the plaintiffs in arguing that the statutory damages provisions withstand Due Process scrutiny.
Statutory Damages Provision
