Click Official ELI Links
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support | ELI Legal Representation Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.

Author Topic: Joel Tenenbaum Case  (Read 2206 times)

Matthew Chan

  • ELI Founder, "Admin-on-Hiatus"
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2763
  • 1st Amendment & Section 230 CDA Advocate
    • View Profile
    • Defiantly
Joel Tenenbaum Case
« on: August 24, 2012, 05:48:11 PM »
http://venturebeat.com/2012/08/24/court-uploads-675k-fine-music-downloading/

Although I personally feel the fine is excessively high, it is very hard to find sympathy with Joel Tenenbaum simply because he was warned SEVERAL times to not engage in copyright infringement.

It is entirely possible that he can file Chapter 7 bankruptcy and sweep this judgment away.

It sounded like he was a stupid, cocky kid that didn't think anything could happen to him. No shortage of stupid, cocky kids nowadays that need a peg or two knocked out of them.

This case will quoted by copyright extortionists but let's not forget the context of his this kid got into the position he did.  This is a very unusual and unorthodox case.
I'm a non-lawyer but not legally ignorant either. Under the 1st Amendment, I have the right to post facts & opinions using rhetorical hyperbole, colloquialisms, metaphors, parody, snark, or epithets. Under Section 230 of CDA, I'm only responsible for posts I write, not what others write.

lucia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 767
    • View Profile
Re: Joel Tenenbaum Case
« Reply #1 on: August 25, 2012, 12:25:12 PM »
I had trouble finding the ruling owing to dead links. I found this:  http://www.scribd.com/doc/23850282/Sony-v-Tenenbaum-Fair-Use-Decision

Some news articles comment on the severity of the fine for 'only' 31 songs. But the ruling note:
his file-sharing software mademore than 800 songs available to other Kazaa users to download

As far as I can tell, his defense was that "fair use" means he can share whatever he wants

His activity continued notwithstanding changes in the case law, making it clear that theconduct was not protected; by 2001, for example, the Ninth Circuit had held that peer-to-peer filesharing was not fair use. See A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004, 1012-19(2001). And his activity continued even after digital music was lawfully available; the iTunesMusic Store, which made authorized digital downloads widely available, debuted in April 2003,approximately 15 months before Tenenbaum’s computer was detected on the Kazaa network.See Apple Launches the iTunes Music Store,
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2003/apr/28musicstore.html (lastvisited Dec. 4, 2009).
Tenenbaum did not contest these facts at summary judgment; he argued,instead, that they just did not matter.



Matthew Chan

  • ELI Founder, "Admin-on-Hiatus"
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2763
  • 1st Amendment & Section 230 CDA Advocate
    • View Profile
    • Defiantly
Re: Joel Tenenbaum Case
« Reply #2 on: August 26, 2012, 02:47:19 PM »
I just read the Court Order.  Joel Tenenbaum really sounds like a piece of crap.  Reading the case backstory, it disgusts me.  As much as I dislike the ruling, Tenenbaum seems to have deserved it.  He blatantly infringed for 8 years!

http://www.scribd.com/doc/103737792/Sony-BMG-v-Tenenbaum-Order-August-23-2012

Read this description excerpt.

There was further evidence about the scope and scale of Tenenbaum’s infringement activities.  His illegal conduct lasted for at least eight years, from 1999 to 2007. Id. at 492-93. During that time, he not only downloaded but also distributed thousands of copyrighted works to users of peer-to-peer file-sharing networks. Id. at 493.

The trial evidence also supports the jury’s determination that Tenenbaum willfully infringed plaintiffs’ copyrights.  He conducted his infringing activities while knowing that lawsuits were being brought against individuals who downloaded and distributed music without authorization. Id. He personally received multiple warnings from various sources – including his father in 2002, his college in 2003, and plaintiffs in 2005 – and he was warned that his activities could subject him to liability of up to $150,000 per infringement.  Id. at 493-94.  In spite of these warnings, he continued to download and distribute copyrighted materials; indeed, even after receiving Sony’s 2005 cease and desist letter, trial evidence shows that defendant continued his activities for two more years, until Sony filed this lawsuit against him.  Id. at 495.

Plaintiffs’ 2005 letter also informed Tenenbaum about the impact of his activities on the music industry and instructed him to preserve all evidence of his activities, including any recordings he made available for distribution; yet in spite of these instructions, Tenenbaum had his operating system on his laptop reinstalled and its hard drive reformatted.  Id. at 494-95 and n.7.  Furthermore, as the First Circuit noted, “strong evidence established that Tenenbaum lied in the course of these legal proceedings in a number of ways.”  Id. at 495. 

At trial, Tenenbaum admitted that he lied in responding to Sony’s discovery requests about the scope of his conduct using online media distribution systems, his use of peer-to-peer networks, and the installment of such networks on his computer. Id.  When he was confronted at trial with his attempts to shift blame for his actions to others – including a foster child living in his family’s home, his sisters, a family house guest, and burglars – Tenenbaum finally admitted responsibility.  Id. at 496.  In short, there was ample evidence of willfulness and the need for deterrence based on Tenenbaum’s blatant contempt of warnings and apparent disregard for the consequences of his actions.
 
I'm a non-lawyer but not legally ignorant either. Under the 1st Amendment, I have the right to post facts & opinions using rhetorical hyperbole, colloquialisms, metaphors, parody, snark, or epithets. Under Section 230 of CDA, I'm only responsible for posts I write, not what others write.

Greg Troy (KeepFighting)

  • ELI Defense Team Member
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1859
    • View Profile
    • Yeah, We Do That.
Re: Joel Tenenbaum Case
« Reply #3 on: August 26, 2012, 06:24:58 PM »
I agree Matthew, I believe that the vast majority of us here truly respect copyright law is will as the intellectual property rights of others. Mr. Tanenbaum received several warnings about his actions including a warning in cease and desist letter two years prior to the actual suit. Considering his actions in the amount of material he distributed I truly see and believe the damages caused to the artists were significant and thus deserved his punishment.

One thing I do find interesting though is even though Sony was aware of Mr. Tenenbaum's actions they were still willing to let it go with a simple cease and desist letter as early as 2005 two years prior to their lawsuit. Sony clearly had a case and could have immediately went for the lawsuit but was willing to be satisfied if Mr. Tenenbaum ceased his infringing. This is just another proof to me that Getty Images actions are truly not in the interest protecting their artists intellectual property rights but are just using legalized extortion as a business model for profit against individuals, mom-and-pop companies and small businesses.
Every situation is unique, any advice or opinions I offer are given for your consideration only. You must decide what is best for you and your particular situation. I am not a lawyer and do not offer legal advice.

--Greg Troy

 

Official ELI Help Options
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support Call | ELI Defense Letter Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.