Date of Birth: 
About Sony BMG v. Tenenbaum
- In the case of Sony BMG Music Entertainment et al.
- v.
- Tenenbaum, record label Sony BMG, along with Warner Bros.
- Records, Atlantic Records, Arista Records, and UMG Recordings, accused Joel Tenenbaum of illegally downloading and sharing files in violation of U.S.
- copyright law.
- It was only the second file-sharing case (after Capitol v.
- Thomas) to go to verdict in the Recording Industry Association of America's (RIAA) anti-downloading litigation campaign.
- (The vast majority of cases having been settled out of court.) After the judge entered a finding of liability, a jury assessed damages of $675,000, which the judge reduced to $67,500 on constitutional grounds, rather than through remittitur. After both parties appealed, the First Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the original damage award of $675,000 and remanded the case to the District Court, ruling that the judge should have avoided the constitutional issue by first considering remittitur.
- The Supreme Court refused to hear Tenenbaum's appeal arguing against the remand.
- A new District Court judge then found no cause for remittitur, and held that the statutory damage award was constitutional.
- Tenenbaum again appealed to the First Circuit, which in June 2013 upheld the award.
Read more at Wikipedia