Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
typodupeerror delete not in
  • Preferences

+-   UMG Calls Infringement Damages 'Excessive'-> on Wednesday May 14 2008, @08:38PM I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property

Submitted by I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property on Wednesday May 14 2008, @08:38PM
court
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Why would UMG, one of the four major RIAA members, consider an infringement award 'grossly excessive'? Naturally, because they were the ones ordered to pay it. While they had no trouble with Jammie Thomas being ordered to pay $222k, some 13,214 times the actual costs, they thought that being ordered to pay ten times the actual damages in Bridgeport v. Justin Combs was just too much. Then again, maybe that's why they didn't complain back when the increased statutory damages section was cut from the PRO-IP Act? Now if they could just cut the rest of the act."
Link to Original Source
submission
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

UMG Calls Infringement Damages 'Excessive' 0 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
Search
Ghost echoes

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.