9th Cir.
12-10344
The court of appeals affirmed a district court judgment of conviction, vacated a restitution order, and remanded the action for further proceedings. The court held that a district court’s jury instruction on the willfulness element of criminal copyright infringement was not plain error where it stated that the government had to prove that the defendant must have known that his actions “may” infringe the copyrights at issue. The court held further that restitution in a criminal copyright case must reflect the victim’s actual losses, not the defendant’s gain.
