RIAA's Excessive Loss Claims Unconstitutional?

from the legal-logic dept

The RIAA's questionable math has been discussed at length in the past -- where they love to trot out the claim that each shared song is worth somewhere between $750 and $30,000 in "losses." While the number is completely bogus for a variety of reasons, it is the number that the industry uses when suing the thousands of people they've sued. Now, Declan McCullough points out an analysis suggesting that these high dollar claims are unconstitutional by being so excessive. Because of this, the writer argues, the RIAA should not be allowed to sue for such a high amount. This would mean that more accused file sharers would likely be willing to challenge the lawsuits in court, rather than settling for a few grand just to get out from under the possibility of owing millions. In other words, some of these cases might actually get argued on the merits -- something the RIAA doesn't seem all that enthusiastic about, despite being the one bringing all of the lawsuits.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Tim, 4 May 2005 @ 4:09am

    No Subject Given

    Do we have any analysis of where the money they gain from all this dubious legal activity actually goes?

    link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 May 2005 @ 8:30am

    Re: No Subject Given

    naked women and beer

    link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Precision Blogger, 4 May 2005 @ 12:42pm

    But the unconstitutionality won't help ...

    I read Declan McCullough's "Note" and his arguments seem pretty compelling. But he goes further and notes that Judges are uncomfortable upholding thix type of ruling even when it's correct, because it puts them so unconservatively at odds with legislators. He argues that is is congress, not the courts, that needs to fix the law to make the minimum statutory awards reasonable.

    Add this to the fact that a person sued by the RIAA is likely to settle for a few thousand rather than risk a court making them pay a $1.5M fine, which could be very expnesive to litigate, to reverse on appeal.

    - PB
    http://precision-blogging.blogspot.com

    link to this | view in thread ]

  4. identicon
    Dave, 28 Jan 2009 @ 8:30pm

    Re: No Subject Given

    More dubious legal activity is my guess. I will eat a pair of my socks, I SWEAR, if someone can prove to me that when the RIAA sues someone, the money goes to the artists.

    link to this | view in thread ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.