• Home
  • 1st Annual Symposium
  • About
  • Available Positions
  • Issues
    • Vol. 4 Issue 2
    • Vol. 4 Issue 1
    • Vol. 3 Issue 3
    • Vol. 3, Issue 2
    • Vol. 3, Issue 1
    • Vol. 2, Issue 3
    • Vol. 2, Issue 2
    • Vol. 2, Issue 1
    • Vol. 1, Issue 1
  • Staff
    • 2009-2010 Staff
    • 2010-2011 Staff
    • 2011-2012 Staff
    • 2012-2013 Staff
  • Submissions
  • Subscribe
Featured Article

A featured article from the current issue of the Intellectual Property Brief.

Daily Blog

A daily blog of IP-related news and issues

Articles

All of the Intellectual Property Brief’s published articles. All articles are hand-selected from outside submissions and from our very own IPB staff members.

Issues

PDF versions of each of the Intellectual Property Brief’s issues.

Short Circuit

Case-by-case summaries of intellectual property related opinions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Home » Copyright, Daily Blog, Featured

UPDATE: Damages in Upcoming Trial in Recording Companies’ Suit Against LimeWire Limited by Recent Court Ruling

Submitted by Ashley Kobi on March 16, 2011 – 9:00 AM2735No Commenthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2011%2F03%2F16%2Fupdate-damages-in-upcoming-trial-in-recording-companies%25e2%2580%2599-suit-against-limewire-limited-by-recent-court-ruling%2FUPDATE%3A+Damages+in+Upcoming+Trial+in+Recording+Companies%E2%80%99+Suit+Against+LimeWire+Limited+by+Recent+Court+Ruling2011-03-16+14%3A00%3A18Ashley+Kobihttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D2735

Hot on the heels of its settlement with a number of music publishers, LimeWire scored a victory in federal court in a related copyright infringement case filed by a number of record companies.

The case is Arista Records, LLC, et al v. Lime Group, et al. The thirteen record company plaintiffs read like a “who’s who” of the recording industry: Arista, Atlantic, BMG Music, Capitol, Elektra, Interscope, LaFace, Motown, Priority, Sony BMG, UMG, Virgin and Warner Brothers.

Arista initially grabbed headlines last May when U.S. District Judge Kimba Wood ruled on summary judgment that LimeWire was liable for copyright infringement and that it wrongfully assisted users in illegally downloading digital recordings.  LimeWire was subsequently shut down by an injunction issued by Judge Wood in October 2010.

With a trial on damages slated to begin on May 2, Judge Wood’s March 10, 2011 opinion limits defendants’ potential financial liability.  The ruling will allow the record label plaintiffs to receive between $7.5 million and $1.5 billion in statutory damages from the defendants ($750 to $150,000 for each post-1972 recording infringed, with approximately 10,000 post-1972 recordings infringed by LimeWire).  In addition, the record labels can receive “actual” damages for infringement of about 1,000 pre-1972 works.

Judge Wood agreed with defendants’ argument that the plaintiff record companies were entitled to one damage award per work infringed and rejected the record labels’ contention that they should receive one award for each discrete infringing upload or download made by individual LimeWire users. But, Judge Wood noted that the amount of statutory damages for a work would take into account the number of direct infringers of that work.

Judge Wood’s opinion echoed an earlier filing by LimeWire that noted that plaintiffs’ suggested damage calculation methodology could conceivably produce an award amounting to trillions of dollars in damages.  Noting that “that is more money than the entire music recording industry has made since Edison’s invention of the phonograph in 1877,” Judge Wood indicated that would be an “absurd result.”

For more coverage on this story, please see:

MSNBC, The Baltimore Sun

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: Ashley Kobi

Ashley Kobi is a 2012 J.D. candidate at American University’s Washington College of Law, where she serves as a Blog Editor on the IP Brief. She is also an Articles Editor on the American University Business Law Review, a student attorney in the civil division of D.C. Law Students in Court, and a student editor for the ABA’s Annual Review of Intellectual Property Law Developments 2011. Ashley completed her undergraduate degree at Drexel University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where she studied international area studies, pre-med, and dance. Prior to starting law school, Ashley worked at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius as a litigation paralegal. During law school she has worked on pharmaceutical policy issues as a dean’s fellow at the Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property and on chemical and biological weapons proliferation prevention at the Partnership for Global Security.

Ashley Kobi has written 24 posts for the IPB.

Leave a comment!

Click here to cancel reply »

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

Copyright »

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Mr. Brainwash’s works recently joined the increasing number of cases on appropriation art after photographer Dennis Morris sued the street artist for use of his 1977 picture of Sid Vicious.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Patents »

Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business

Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business

Shortly after the oral arguments between Monsanto and Bowman, WCL hosted both parties for a post argument discussion. Recently the Supreme Court ruled on the case, requiring annual purchases of Monsanto’s soybeans.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Trademark »

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme, one of the most coveted skate-inspired clothing brands, is suing women’s clothing brand Married to the Mob and its founder Leah McSweeney for trademark infringement to the tune of $10 million.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Facebook

Accepting Submissions

The IP Brief is currently accepting submissions. We are looking for papers that address a legal topic relating to any area of intellectual property. Please submit completed papers and a cover page with the name and title of the article to ipbrief [at] wcl.american.edu. Any questions can also be sent to this e-mail address.

Blogroll

  • American University Washington College of Law
  • Carrollogos
  • Copyright Blog
  • GamePolitics
  • Intellectual Property Watch
  • PatentlyO
  • Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
  • Spicy IP
  • The TTABlog®
  • ©ollectanea

Tags

Archives

  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010

Random Posts

Exploitation or Just the Game? The NCAA, Collegiate Athletes, and Video Games Facebook Friending = False Advertising?  An Intriguing Case to Watch May Have the Answer Is the Secret Out? A Coca-Cola Formula is Announced to the World Kung Fu Panda: Not Dreamt Up by DreamWorks? High Court Issues Unanimous Decision in NFL Logo and Trademark Case NinjaVideo Not Stealthy Enough: Two Founders Plead Guilty to Conspiracy and Criminal Copyright Charges Louis Vuitton Alleges Trademark Dilution “Where There Is A Sea There Are Pirates.”  The Pirate Bay Threatens To Live Up To Its Name Urban Outfitters, the Navajo Nation, and Another Reminder of the Need for Greater Traditional Cultural Expression Protections Oral Arguments from Costco v. Omega Unveil Many Questions and One Laugh The Short Circuit: Brief Analyses of Recently Issued Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Opinions Blizzard Sues Cheating Gamers for Copyright Infringement Skullcandy Files Lawsuit Against Skelanimals Over Logo Design Groupon, Yelp Sued by Patent Troll
(refresh random posts)

Latest Video Post

Relatively New Anti-Piracy PSA: Another Analogy Comparison of Piracy to Stealing Cars or an Effective Message?

Recent Posts

  • Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business
  • Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million
  • Appropriating Sid Vicious
  • Chick-Fil-A’s ‘Eat Mor Chikin’ Trumps Kale-Promotion Slogan
  • Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

Twitter

  • No public Twitter messages.
  • Copy / Paste
  • Site Search
  • Wikipedia
  • Google
  • Facts
  • Amazon
  • eBay
  • Outlook
  • Gmail
  • Y! Mail
  • Twitter
  • Search & Share
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia Premium theme by Colorlabs Project
The American University Intellectual Property Brief is licensed by the staff of the American University Intellectual Property Brief under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. IPBrief.net is hosted by Dan Rosenthal. For technical queries, contact dan@danrosenthal.org

Creative Commons License