DvG, no.
Part 1:"Statutory damages" is there for a reason and it serves a purpose where
"actual damages" and
"profits" are
hard to calculate. (More on it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_damages and click links to US Code)
But, if "actual damages" and "profits" are negligible or none, then as a start it could be like "tax brackets" or a "warning-penalty" system. Not a fixed amount just because you had to pay legal fees.
The burden of punishment should be in relation to how much the punished can bear.Also, I am assuming the infringer is "not innocent".
IF innocent or if a mistake was made due to a lack of knowledge or proper understanding, the punishment should further be reduced by half (at minimum) to full pardon (based on the court's judgment).
PS: Let me explain:
Modeling tax bracket for any types of legal fine:
A college kid making $12,000 USD/year working at McDonald starts a blog on the side. S/he uses a photo that was copyrighted. The copyright holder brings a lawsuit and asks for $750 USD in damages.
The kid has made no profits for herself/himself AND the use of this photo has not caused any loss of income or brand reputation damage to the copyright holder.
Now, in this case, the only way to get at $750 USD amount is by implying "Statutory damages". But since the kid is in 10% tax bracket (12K minus deductions, etc.), the Statutory damages = (100/40)*10
40% tier = highest bracket = $750
10% tier = (40/100)*10 = 4
$750/4 = $187.50
(The burden of punishment should be in relation to how much the punished can bear).If innocent, the maximum fine above should be no more than 187.50/2 = $93.75 USD.
Or, ideally, $0 and a warning for first offense.
Note: I have picked arbitrary numbers. I am sure, many folks much smarter than I can do a much better job at fixing this broken loophole which allows leeches to swim.
Part 2:I have not spent enough time in copyright laws to make concrete suggestions on how it should be improved and why current "Statutory damages" is the
loophole that Getty and Getty clones are exploiting. (Note this point. This argument is going to repeat again and again.)
But I can tell you this, this whole forum and forums like ELI are full of victims (commoners) of complex laws. A Netflix documentary is long due on this and like Pay Day loan sharks, some folks are awaiting possible jail time or business shut down.
I believe the end of this BS is near. Be it in the next 5 months or 5 years or 15 years.
Part 3:DvG, I have two questions for you:
1. Do you think the current copyright laws are clear, concise, and most importantly
fair (with no room for improvements)?
2. By discouraging and scaring common people here on this forum, what do you gain? Boost to your ego? Satisfaction of trolling? Or do you feel smart thinking, I am a contrarian.
For example, you clearly do not have my interests at hand. So why do you expect I engage with you? Or anyone for that matter.
In this fight, I have my skin in the game. You don't.
If someday you can understand this basic principle, you may very well be surprised by discovering many other better things are out there that deserves your limited time on this planet.
Are you alluding to wanting statutory damages eliminated from the range of possible penalties available to a plaintiff when filing an infringement claim in Federal court? I just want to be clear on your point of view.