Feds Support $1.92 Million RIAA File Sharing Verdict

The Obama administration told a federal judge Friday the $1.92 million jury verdict against a Minnesota woman for sharing 24 music tracks on Kazaa was constitutionally sound despite defense claims it was unconstitutionally excessive.

After the June verdict against Jammie Thomas-Rasset, defense attorneys urged U.S. District Judge Michael Davis to set it aside or reduce dramatically the $80,000-per-song award, arguing it was “excessive, shocking and monstrous.”

In response to that challenge to the Copyright Act, with allows damages up to $150,000 per song, the Justice Department told Davis in a 26-page brief that the verdict should not be overturned on grounds it was unconstitutionally excessive.

“The current damages range provides compensation for copyright owners because, inter alia, there exists situations in which actual damages are hard to quantify,” the government wrote. (.pdf) “Furthermore, in establishing that range, Congress took into account the need to deter the millions of users of new media from infringing copyrights in an environment where many vi0lators believe that they will go unnoticed.”

At the time of the Minnesota verdict, Thomas-Rasset, 32, was the nation’s only file-sharing defendant to go before a jury out of the 30,000-plus cases brought by the Recording Industry Association of America the past five years. Most all defendants settled out of court for a few thousand dollars. Trial for the second defendant to go before a jury ended last month with a $675,000 verdict in favor of the RIAA for sharing 30 songs online.

It is not unusual that the government weigh into a case in which the constitutionality of the law is at issue. The Obama administration, and the Bush administration have weighed in on lawsuits in which the Copyright Act was under the microscope – always in support of the law.

But Friday’s filing was the first time the government announced that an eye-popping $80,000 per track damages award was not excessive.