Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Ps are recording companies that owned or controlled exclusive rights to copyrights in sound recordings at issue in this lawsuit. Ps filed a Complaint against D alleging that she infringed their copyrighted sound recordings by illegally downloading and distributing the recordings via the online peer-to-peer file sharing application known as Kazaa. Ps sought injunctive relief, statutory damages, costs, and attorney fees. In Jury Instruction 15, the Court instructed: 'The act of making copyrighted sound recordings available for electronic distribution on a peer-to-peer network, without a license from the copyright owners, violates the copyright owners' exclusive right of distribution, regardless of whether actual distribution has been shown.' The jury found that D had willfully infringed on all 24 of the sound recordings at issue, and awarded Ps statutory damages in the amount of $ 9,250 for each willful infringement. D filed a Motion for New Trial, or in the Alternative, for Remittitur, based solely on the issue of the constitutionality of the Copyright Act's statutory damages provision in the case. Ps asked that the Court enter an injunction barring D from further infringement and requiring D to destroy all infringing copies of Ps' sound recordings in her possession. The Court sua sponte stated that it was contemplating granting a new trial on the grounds that it had committed a manifest error of law in giving Jury Instruction 15. D argues that if the Court erred in giving Jury Instruction No. 15, it must grant a new trial because the Special Verdict Form did not specify whether the jurors had found an actual distribution or not. Ps assert that even if the Court erred that error had no effect on the jury verdict because D violated the reproduction right and Ps proved that their agent, MediaSentry, downloaded songs from D.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co