Joel Tenenbaum’s Unwavering War against the RIAA: The Appellate Decision

Part 3: The Decision

On May 21, 2012, the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal regarding Joel Tenenbaum’s long fight against the RIAA over unauthorized file-sharing.  In short, this means that the case will continue.  The case will go back to U.S. District Court Judge Rya Zobel who will decide whether or not to uphold the $675,000 damages award on appeal.  In a brief statement, the RIAA stated, “we’re pleased with the decision.”  On the other hand, Mr. Tenenbaum is far from pleased.  He stated, “I can’t believe the system would uphold a six-figure damages amount for downloading 30 songs on a file-sharing system that everybody used.  I can’t believe the court would uphold something that ludicrous.”  Finally, the Obama administration urged the Supreme Court not to take the case as some issues remain unsolved, such as what the judge might do concerning the damages award.

What is the significance of the Supreme Court’s actions?  Well, in the music-sharing context, not much.  In recent years, the RIAA has decided to stop suing individual file sharers for copyright infringement.  Instead, the industry’s strategy has shifted to focus on shutting down the sources of online piracy and convincing Internet service providers to warn and punish subscribers who engage in these activities.  This makes the Tenenbaum case a relic in the RIAA’s mind, as it is only one of two cases that is still being currently litigated.

From a legal perspective, this case has seen an original $675,000 verdict, which was later reduced to $67,500 by a lower court judge, and finally a reversal which reinstated the original verdict.  With its decision, the Supreme Court missed an opportunity to answer an interesting question which remains unresolved: “whether judges ultimately have the authority to reduce damages awards in Copyright Act cases.”  What we do know is that the Tenenbaum case has no end in sight.  Tenenbaum’s lawyer, Harvard Law School professor Charles Nesson, had hoped that the Supreme Court would take the case and avoid an “endless litigation rat hole” for his client.  Unfortunately, a rat hole, or perhaps more accurately, a black hole, seems to be exactly what we have here until one side presumably concedes.  Nevertheless, one has to applaud Joel Tenenbaum’s tenacity and perseverance regarding an issue that he and others feel strongly about.

Other Parts:

Part 1: Background and The District Court’s Decision

Part 2: Joel Tenenbaum’s Unwavering War Against the RIAA: The Appellate Decision Coming Soon
—

* Vlad Vidaeff is a fourth-year JD/MBA student at Wake Forest University.  He holds a Bachelor of Arts in Sport Management and a minor in French from the University of Michigan.  Upon graduation in May 2013, Mr. Vidaeff intends to either practice corporate law or pursue a career in marketing.