RIAA Demands $75 Trillion from LimeWire

carmen510

Deity
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
8,126
Location
NESing Forums
Spoiler :
The music industry wants LimeWire to pay up to $75 trillion in damages after losing a copyright infringement claim. Manhattan federal Judge Kimba Wood has labeled this request "absurd."

To put that number into perspective, the U.S. GDP is around 14 trillion -- less than one fifth of what the music industry is requesting. Heck, the GDP of the entire world is between 59 and 62 trillion. That's right, the music industry wants LimeWire to pay more money than exists in the entire world.

Popular file-sharing service LimeWire was shut down last October, after Judge Wood found them liable for copyright infringement in May 2010.

According to Law.com, the RIAA and the 13 record companies that are suing LimeWire for copyright infringement have demanded damages ranging from $400 billion to $75 trillion, and have claimed that Section 504(c)(1) of the Copyright Act allow them to request damages for each instance of infringement where two or more parties were liable. In other words, the RIAA thinks it should be entitled to damages not only for the individual works, but for every time that work was infringed (i.e. downloaded by another user).

At the moment, about 11,000 songs have been identified as "infringed" material, and each song probably has probably been downloaded thousands of times. The RIAA thinks it should be compensated for each individual download.

Judge Wood disagrees. In a 14-page ruling (PDF), Judge Wood said that the music industry is entitled only to a "single statutory damage award from Defendants per work infringed," for several reasons, including "Absurd Result." According to the document, the "Plaintiffs' position on statutory damages also offends the 'canon that we should avoid endorsing statutory interpretations that would lead to absurd results.'"

The document goes on to read: "As it stands now, Defendants face a damage award that 'could be in the hundreds of millions of dollars, if not over a billion dollars.'"

Judge Wood also points out that "if one multiplies the maximum statutory damage award ($150,000) by approximately 10,000 post-1972 works, Defendants face a potential award of over a billion dollars in statutory damages alone. If Plaintiffs were able to pursue a statutory damage theory predicated on the number of direct infringers per work, Defendants' damages could reach into the trillions. As Defendants note, 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.'"

This "absurd results" clause isn't anything new, Judge Wood points out. She mentions the 2010 Arista Records LLC v. Usenet.com, Inc. case, in which Arista Records requested the court calculate the damages by multiplying the maximum amount of damages ($150,000) by the number of infringements (878), or $131,700,000. The court found the defendants liable for $6,585,000, by multiplying the number of infringements by $7,500.

Unfortunately, this still isn't great news for LimeWire -- while Judge Wood says the music industry is entitled to only a single statutory damage award per infringed work, there are still 11,000 works. That means LimeWire could still be liable for damages in excess of one billion.


http://www.pcworld.com/article/223431/riaa_thinks_limewire_owes_75_trillion_in_damages.html

Well, I think this just about sums up why the RIAA is an enormous pile of fail.

What sum do you think LimeWire should pay up, if any? Is the RIAA even remotely justified for demanding $75 trillion? Do you think this case will be a precedent for further cases regarding copyright infringement?
 
Dear RIAA:

Since you started suing people, have your sales increased? How about what you're fighting? Has infringement decreased?

I would recommend you consider your course of action, as it's not working.
 
I thought LimeWire was full of viruses anyways.
 
Ridiculously punitive damages are one thing, but demanding more money than exists in the world from one relatively small-fry company? Are they completely off their rockers?
 
Can't do the time, don't do the crime. The statutory damage scheme is very clear. The Judge is being a bit activist here by making a policy decision for the legislature.
 
Ridiculously punitive damages are one thing, but demanding more money than exists in the world from one relatively small-fry company? Are they completely off their rockers?

Yes. :)
 
This is worse than that death squad (whose name I can't remember) that scours the internet looking for blogs, websites, and forums that quote "copyrighted" articles and sues the bloggers/webmasters/posters for infringement.
 
You think maybe there is someone in the RIAA that really believe if it wasn't for piracy they would have $75 Trillion?

Wait? Are they saying Lime stole $75 Trillion? The world doesn't have that much money. Now it's been while since I've done word math problems, but I'm pretty sure I was never asked "If Jen has 2 apples, and then sues Dave for stealing 5 Apples from from Jen, how many apples does Jen have?"
 
Are they gonna sue BitTorrent then? C'mon, they already killed Napster and it didn't work.
 
Man LimeWire, that brings me back, I used that from I think '99 to 2003 or so.

In other news homeless man asks blue collar worker for $6.8 million in spare change.
 
I'm sure this isn't legit. I'm guessing that's an early April Fools Joke by PCworld.
 
This is worse than that death squad (whose name I can't remember) that scours the internet looking for blogs, websites, and forums that quote "copyrighted" articles and sues the bloggers/webmasters/posters for infringement.


Oh, Rightshaven. Well, good news, last week a judge ruled in one of their cases that even reprinting full articles could be fair use. So in their quest to sue the world, they ended up getting a ruling that actually solidifies freedoms to reprint news. Sometimes there actually are happy endings.

Let's just hope the happy ending isn't overturned on appeal.

I'm sure this isn't legit. I'm guessing that's an early April Fools Joke by PCworld.

Unfortunately, even if it is a joke in this case, it hasn't always been in the past. The Russian music site Allofmp3.com was sued by the RIAA for $1.65 trillion a few years ago, which exceeds Russia's annual GDP, and thus was also a patently ridiculous amount to sue for. In this case they want more than the entire world's GDP, so it's even more patently ridiculous, but the probably just used the same $150,000 per song * number of songs formula they did before. Maybe this being in the U.S. will cause legislators to see how absurd of lawsuits the law currently allows, and thus change the law a bit. Or by an order of magnitude or four.
 
For what it matters the world GDP is around 58 trillion. This means the RIAA is trying to sue for more money than actually exists in the world
 
Were it not for piracy, Lady Gaga would have brought in at least $100 trillion for the music industry in 2010 alone.
 
Frostwire is superior in many ways.
 
Top Bottom