For the first time, the Obama administration is weighing in on a Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) file sharing lawsuit. The case involves a former Boston University student challenging a peer-to-peer file sharing suit, and the administration says that fines of $750 to $150,000 per violation of the Copyright Act are warranted.
"The remedy of statutory damages for copyright infringement has been the cornerstone of our federal copyright law since 1790, and Congress acted reasonably in crafting the current incarnation of the statutory damages provision," wrote Justice Department trial attorney Michelle Bennett to a Massachusetts federal judge. "Congress sought to account for both the difficulty of quantifying damages in the context of copyright infringement and the need to deter millions of users of new technology from infringing copyrighted works in an environment where many violators believe that their activities will go unnoticed. The harms caused by copyright infringement are not negated merely because an infringer does not seek commercial gain. In the context of online media distribution systems, infringement without commercial gain limits a copyright owner抯 ability to distribute legal copies of copyrighted works. The public in turn suffers from lost jobs and wages, lost tax revenue, and higher prices for honest purchasers of copyrighted works. In light of these harms and the important purposes served by the awarding of statutory damages, the statutory damages range chosen by Congress satisfies due process."
The administration's stance on the issue comes as no surprise, considering that two top lawyers in President Obama's Justice Department are former RIAA lawyers: Donald Verrilli Jr. is the associate deputy attorney general who fought against Grokster, and Tom Perrilli argued in 2002 that Internet service providers should release customer information to the RIAA without a court subpoena.
"The remedy of statutory damages for copyright infringement has been the cornerstone of our federal copyright law since 1790, and Congress acted reasonably in crafting the current incarnation of the statutory damages provision," wrote Justice Department trial attorney Michelle Bennett to a Massachusetts federal judge. "Congress sought to account for both the difficulty of quantifying damages in the context of copyright infringement and the need to deter millions of users of new technology from infringing copyrighted works in an environment where many violators believe that their activities will go unnoticed. The harms caused by copyright infringement are not negated merely because an infringer does not seek commercial gain. In the context of online media distribution systems, infringement without commercial gain limits a copyright owner抯 ability to distribute legal copies of copyrighted works. The public in turn suffers from lost jobs and wages, lost tax revenue, and higher prices for honest purchasers of copyrighted works. In light of these harms and the important purposes served by the awarding of statutory damages, the statutory damages range chosen by Congress satisfies due process."
The administration's stance on the issue comes as no surprise, considering that two top lawyers in President Obama's Justice Department are former RIAA lawyers: Donald Verrilli Jr. is the associate deputy attorney general who fought against Grokster, and Tom Perrilli argued in 2002 that Internet service providers should release customer information to the RIAA without a court subpoena.
