• Latest
    • AI
    • Careers
    • Diversity
    • Future of IP
    • Law firm news
    • Standard-essential patents
    • Trade secrets
    • Unified Patent Court
  • Patents
  • Trademarks
  • Copyright
  • Jurisdiction reports
  • Rankings
    • About Rankings
    • China Rankings
    • Germany Rankings
    • Global Rankings
    • UK Rankings
    • USA Rankings
    • Diversity & Inclusion Top 100 2025
    • Leaders 2025
    • Company Directory
  • WIPR Insights
    • Magazines
    • Whitepapers
  • Events
    • Conferences
    • Conference Videos
    • Webinars
  • About
  • Contact
  • Newsletter
  • Login
  • Subscribe
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Newsletter
  • Login


Subscribe
  • Home
  • Copyright
  • US court confirms Tenenbaum copyright fine
26 June 2013Copyright

US court confirms Tenenbaum copyright fine

A US file-sharer who was fined more than $600,000 for sharing 30 songs online has been told his original fine must stand, following a lengthy appeal process.

In 2009 Joel Tenenbaum was ordered to pay costs of $675,000 for sharing songs on file-sharing website Kazaa after he was taken to court by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) on behalf of four record labels: Sony, Warner Brothers, Arista Records and UMG Recordings.

Tenenbaum, a Boston University graduate, had been pursued for damages relating to 30 infringed songs. However, it is alleged the number of songs he distributed, over an eight year period, was far more.

Following a lengthy route through the US legal system, including an appeal to the Supreme Court, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled on June 25 that the original penalty should stand.

Circuit Judge Howard wrote: “From 1999 to at least 2007 Tenenbaum downloaded and distributed copyrighted music without authorisation, using various peer-to-peer networks.

“Tenenbaum knew that his conduct was illegal, but he pressed on, ignoring warnings from his father, his college, and recording companies.

“At trial, Sony presented evidence that Tenenbaum's activities led to the same type of harm that Congress foresaw: loss of the value of its copyrights, reduced income and profits, and job losses.”

Tenenbaum argued that the award of $675,000 violates due process because it is not tied to the actual injury that he caused, which he estimates to be no more than $450, or the cost of 30 albums at $15 each.

However, Judge Howard wrote: “This argument asks us to disregard the deterrent effect of statutory damages, the inherent difficulty in proving damages in a copyright suit, and Sony's evidence of the harm that it suffered from conduct such as Tenenbaum's.”

Tenenbaum has so far not commented on the ruling.

Already registered?

Login to your account


If you don't have a login or your access has expired, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content.

For more information on individual annual subscriptions for full paid access and corporate subscription options please contact us.

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk




Editor's picks

Ferrari wins Testarossa classic car case at EU court
Trademarks
Ferrari wins Testarossa classic car case at EU court
2 July 2025

Editor's picks

Trademarks
Ferrari wins Testarossa classic car case at EU court
2 July 2025
Patents
A step too far? Why Stewart’s approach is dividing opinion
20 June 2025
AI
What is an ‘AI training declaration’ and who might need one?
20 June 2025
Future of IP
‘Sad beige’ lawsuit shows how hard it is for influencers to stand out
20 June 2025
Trademarks
Creative licence: Inside the LEGO Group’s Asia playbook
16 June 2025
Copyright
‘Cynical and bewildering’: UK omits copyright protections in Data Bill
13 June 2025

More articles

‘Once is good enough’: Getty closing arguments rely on scant evidence
Tech litigators join Hogan Lovells’ Paris practice from A&O Shearman
Getty v Stability AI: Five takeaways from the courtroom so far
Defending the realm: How a key MoD supplier crafts its IP strategy
How IP firms can champion LGBTQ+ staff beyond Pride 2025
A step too far? Why Stewart’s approach is dividing opinion
What is an ‘AI training declaration’ and who might need one?
Vidal: Settled expectations factor is ‘unconstitutional overreach’

  • Home
  • News
  • Directory
  • About us
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Terms of Subscription

WIPR
Newton Media Ltd
Kingfisher House
21-23 Elmfield Road
BR1 1LT
United Kingdom

  • Twitter
  • Linkedin