Re: Reuters: Damages of $1.9 million could backfire on music industry

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Steve Lamont <spl () ncmir ucsd edu>
Date: June 21, 2009 9:58:36 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Reuters:  Damages of $1.9 million could backfire on  
music industry

> Even for law-abiding citizens who believe that labels have every
> right to protect their copyrights, a verdict of almost $2 million
> could be hard to swallow. Indeed, the Recording Industry Assn. of
> America said it was willing to reach a settlement with
> Thomas-Rasset, as it had been all along.

Has anyone asked what seems to me to be a couple of obvious questions
here: why did a putative *jury of her peers* award such a large
amount?  Was there some exacerbating factor which perhaps angered the
jury to such an extent that they decided to throw the book at the
defendant?  After all, huge companies and slick corporate lawyers
aren't the most popular of entities.

As reported, the jury had tremendous leeway in awarding damages.  Why
did they pick the number they chose?

I suspect, as always, we're being told only part of the story.

                                                        spl




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com