Share/E-mail This Story

Email This



Judge Rejects RIAA's Attempt To Claim 'Trillions' In Damages From Limewire

from the try-again dept

The judge in the Limewire case has rejected the record labels' attempt to say that Limewire should pay statutory damages based on each time an unauthorized file was shared, instead pointing out that, at a maximum, each song is only subject to a single statutory damage amount, no matter how often it was shared. The judge pointed out that the labels were being ridiculous:
"Plaintiffs are suggesting an award that is more money than the entire music recording industry has made since Edison's invention of the phonograph in 1877," Wood wrote, citing a Lime Group court filing referring to the inventor Thomas Edison. She called this an "absurd result."


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Mar 11th, 2011 @ 2:54pm

    "Plaintiffs are suggesting an award that is more money than the entire music recording industry has made since Edison's invention of the phonograph in 1877"

    So what? The politicians have never questioned it, what did they forget to pay this guy?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 11th, 2011 @ 3:43pm

    When you lie enough about facts at some point you start believing your own lies.

    Sure makes them look like idiots to be called out and caught red-handed.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 11th, 2011 @ 3:48pm

    I once ripped off a recording industry so badly they were forced to get a real job!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 11th, 2011 @ 4:14pm

    actual damages for songs < 1972

    The article says that they can get actual damages (not statutory) for pre-1972 songs? Do statutory damages not apply to pre-1972 recordings?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 11th, 2011 @ 4:19pm

    I'm surprised they even argued a "per-infringement" basis. It's pretty settled that statutory damages don't work that way.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Mar 11th, 2011 @ 4:24pm

    Re:

    I was actually more surprised by:

    ... citing a Lime Group court filing referring to the inventor Thomas Edison.

    Oh, THAT Edison.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Mar 11th, 2011 @ 4:42pm

    Re: Re:

    Indeed, I was thinking of the other Edison that invented the phonograph in 1877 :)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 11th, 2011 @ 5:12pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    It is pretty unfair that Phil Edison never gets any credit.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    icon
    Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), Mar 11th, 2011 @ 5:31pm

    Re: Re:

    The plaintiffs responded by stating that Limewire had stolen all of the music created since 1877, thus preventing them from selling any music anywhere since Limewire's inception.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Mar 11th, 2011 @ 5:36pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    You are overstating the case, sir. Home taping killed music in the eighties. We haven't had any since.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Mossup, Mar 11th, 2011 @ 6:28pm

    Test cases?

    How much do these legal actions depend on whether the judge owns an ipod or a sony walkman mp3? Coz in setting legal precidents it largely must be an issue of the white collar, white earbud wearers versus the blue collar real music lovers!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 11th, 2011 @ 9:36pm

    Now I'm sure that the RIAA is run by Dr. Evil.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    iveseenitall, Mar 11th, 2011 @ 11:18pm

    Let's stop referring to members of the Spite Industry as somehow representing the Music Industry.
    Or how about we ban music made before 2012. That would give everyone the rest of the year to focus on music and work on putting a new album together.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 11th, 2011 @ 11:57pm

    Re:

    IT's in the works,and is going to be snuck in in the middle of the night into COICA.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    G Thompson (profile), Mar 12th, 2011 @ 12:46am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    You are wrong, it wasn't home taping. It was them damn youngsters knee tapping to those fandangled phony-graffy machines that the cacophony of screeching came out of that did it.

    How dare they illegally tap to our music.

    Thinks of the percussionists!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 12th, 2011 @ 1:33am

    maybe if they just used the handy chart here even the politician could understand the folly.

    http://www.cracked.com/funny-4003-the-pirate-bay/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    icon
    Shon Gale (profile), Mar 13th, 2011 @ 8:04am

    I say bring on the RIAA. We will treat them like we do drug pushers in my neighborhood. 'Stab 'em if they stand. Shoot 'em if they run.' The RIAA has ruined the music business. No one wants to buy s**t from those assholes or anyone they represent.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), Mar 13th, 2011 @ 6:11pm

    Re:

    That article is awesome.

    The continuing operation of The Pirate Bay is chiefly a triumph for enemies of the RIAA, which, by our last count, is everyone who isn't the RIAA.

    And I remember when Cracked used to be a not-funny rip-off of Mad Magazine. How times have changed.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    phil klisma, Mar 14th, 2011 @ 3:42am

    RIAA

    This mentality goes a long way toward discrediting any stance RIAA can take regarding file sharing. if you read deeply between the lines they seem to be interested in claiming revenues that would never have existed. I personally download a lot of things, and almost immediately delete them once i see they are TRASH! i save a lot of money this way. if something is really good i go and buy it BCZ the real item in your hand is better than a degraded low quality alternative file, especially if you are an audiophile/videophile.
    file sharing is the biggest advertisement that ever existed and its not my fault if recording industries are producing and releasing really lame material, and people want to see the product and examine the quality before they spend money and are stuck with garbage.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    Dan0, Mar 14th, 2011 @ 9:40am

    Statutory damages

    Since Edison is the grandfather of all recorded music, and the RIAA is claiming that the infringement is based on a per song basis, They should instead have the award go to the Edison family from NOW ON! What do you think about that RIAA??? :-)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Bloodyscot, Mar 14th, 2011 @ 10:29am

    When cassette and CD's wear out we should not have to repay for copyrights to replace them

    When cassettes and CD's wear out over time if we replace them we have to repay for the copyrights on the music for the same songs on the same media so if people download to remake the same cassettes or CD's they already own would that not be legal under the fair use clause of the law?
    The problem RIAA has is proving actual damages since some downloads could be legal or not have been a sale, which would be impossible to determine actual damages without a lot of guessing but by trying to use statutory damages allows them to get around that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This