[IP] Re: Reuters: Damages of $1.9 million could backfire on music industry

[David Farber <dave@farber.net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: June 21, 2009 11:43:26 AM EDT
To: dave@farber.net
Cc: Steve Lamont <spl@ncmir.ucsd.edu>
Subject: Re: [IP] Re:   Reuters:  Damages of $1.9 million could  
backfire on music industry

On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 10:24:37 -0400
David Farber <dave@farber.net> wrote:

> Has anyone asked what seems to me to be a couple of obvious questions
> here: why did a putative *jury of her peers* award such a large
> amount?  Was there some exacerbating factor which perhaps angered the
> jury to such an extent that they decided to throw the book at the
> defendant?  After all, huge companies and slick corporate lawyers
> aren't the most popular of entities.
>
> As reported, the jury had tremendous leeway in awarding damages.  Why
> did they pick the number they chose?
>
> I suspect, as always, we're being told only part of the story.
The most detailed coverage I saw was at Ars Technica.  Briefly, I
suspect that the jury felt that she had lied -- see
http://feeds.arstechnica.com/~r/arstechnica/index/~3/WYXd56Fa1L0/ 
jammie-thomas-takes-the-stand-admits-to-major-misstep.ars



		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb




-------------------------------------------