Maximum PC infringement RSS Feed

RIAA tries to Bribe Jammie Thomas to have Judgment Reversed

Pulkit Chandna — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 16:39:07 -0600

Jammie Thomas-Rasset must have been relived by last week's court ruling that lowered the damages awarded against her to $54,000 from a staggering $1.92 million. The 32-year-old mother of four was found guilty of illegally sharing copyrighted music through a P2P network in 2007. Relieved she might be, but a sense of triumph still evades her. Her attorneys had made it clear last week that they will not be satisfied until the fine itself is scrapped.

They appear to be in no mood to abandon or ease their stand after rejecting RIAA's offer to settle the lawsuit for $25,000 on Wednesday, the very same day as it was made. Recording Industry Association of America RIAA's out-of-court settlement offer required that Thomas-Rasset request the court to remove last week's decision from the record. The recording industry had also warned Thomas-Rasset that they would contest last week's ruling, if their settlement terms were rejected.

RIAA Ponders Next Move in Jammie Thomas Case

Paul Lilly — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:23:31 -0600

You didn't really expect the RIAA to roll over and accept the latest verdict in the Jammie Thomas trial, did you? There's too much at stake for that to happen. To quickly recap, the Minnesota mother who opted not to settle with the RIAA for $5,000 over copyright infringement allegations ended up being hammered in court to the tune $222,000, an award that was later increased to $1.9 million following a retrial last June.

The shocking turn of events came last Friday when District Court judge Michael Davis reduced the award by 97 percent, dropping the "monstrous and shocking" damages to $54,000. Davis then gave the RIAA seven days to challenge his ruling and schedule a trial on the damages.

Since then, there's been yet another twist in a case which has already had more twists and turns than a Six Flags theme park. While $54,000 is a far cry from $1.9 million, Thomas' lawyers have challenged the constitutionality of not just the current ruling, but the minimum amount of statutory damages. That's what we call a game changer, and as CNet words it, one that puts the RIAA in a pickle.

"This means that the RIAA cannot avoid the constitutional issue, even if (it accepts the latest ruling on the reduced damages)," said Kiwi Camara, one of Thomas' attorneys.

But even if Thomas' side doesn't challenge the ruling, the RIAA almost has to, lest the organization let a legal precedent remain that could impact any future copyright claims.

"There's some interesting language in (Davis' decision)," said Denise Howell, a Silicon Valley-based attorney. "The constitutional nature of statutory damages comes up over and over again. If you're in any kind of copyright case, and you've gotten a very high damage award entered against you, you're going to want to bring this up and use Judge Davis' reasoning. I know a few folks in other copyright cases that have nothing to do with P2P file sharing but think this is quite an interesting development."

So do we, and like everyone else, we'll have to wait to see how it unfolds.

Rambus on a Roll, Defeats Nvidia in Court

Paul Lilly — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:45:47 -0600

in basketball, a shooter sometimes gets into a 'zone,' a mental state where everything's going for them and they just can't miss a shot. This is exactly the place Rambus finds itself in, only in a different kind of court, and a different game altogether. The latest opponent to go down against Rambus is Nvidia, who a judge ruled was guilty of violating three patents belonging to Rambus.

"We are pleased with the initial determination from the ITC finding two patents invalid but disappointed about its ruling on the other three patents," David Shannon, Nvidia's executive vice president and general counsel, said in a statement. "All five of the patents continue to be subject to re-examination proceedings in the Patent and Trademark Office, in which the Office has consistently found the asserted claims of these patents to be invalid. We will now take the patents before the full commission for a final decision on whether any of these patents are valid, enforceable, and infringed."

While it remains to be seen if the verdict will stick and, if it does, what the patents will be worth, the legal momentum has clearly shifted in Rambus' favor. Less than a week ago, the company came to a $900 million settlement agreement with Samsung, in which Samsung will pay $200 million right away, and the remainder over the course of five years.

Damages Significantly Reduced in Jammie Thomas Case

Pulkit Chandna — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 18:43:44 -0600

Minnesota resident Jammie Thomas-Rasset, 32, was thrust into the public eye in 2006, when the music industry chose her for the most unenviable role imaginable: the poster girl of the brand of digital piracy that the average Joe practices from the comforts of his home. Several record companies sued her for copyright infringement on April 19, 2006.

Though the court originally ordered Thomas-Rasset to pay a fine of $220,000, the fine was raised to a vertiginous $1.92 million, or $80,000 per song, at a retrial. She was now left with a three-pronged hope: a court will scrap the fine or at least lower it; or a bankruptcy court will pave the way for her escape; or she will land a major book deal.

But she can now heave a sigh of relief as a U.S. District court has lowered the fine to relatively manageable levels. Michael Davis, chief judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, lowered the fine to $54,000. "The need for deterrence cannot justify a $2 million verdict for stealing and illegally distributing 24 songs for the sole purpose of obtaining free music," the Judge remarked in his verdict.

The decision leaves the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) with seven days to either accept the fresh fine or request a retrial. Joe Sibley, one of the defendant's attorneys, told Cnet that the judge had made “it much more equitable and this was much closer to the $0 award that we were seeking."

Cnet's Greg Sandoval has learnt from his sources that RIAA is not too keen on taking this any further as it only wanted to use the case as a deterrent. Sandoval also reminds everyone that Thomas-Rasset's refusal to settle with RIAA left it with no choice but to drag her to court.

Jammie in Grimmer Times

Image Credit: Wired

Samsung and Rambus Reach $900 Million Settlement Agreement

Paul Lilly — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:45:02 -0600

If at first you don't succeed, sue, sue again. The reason? You might score a $900 million settlement, just as sue-happy Rambus did after years of litigation over memory patents. And this could be just the beginning, but more on that in a moment.

Under terms of the agreement, Samsung will pay Rambus $200 million upfront, followed by quarterly payments in the neighborhood of $25 million over five years. Samsung also agreed to purchase $200 million worth of Rambus stock, bringing the final tally to $900 million.

The settlement puts to rest a long-standing dispute over DRAM technology licenses, and going forward, the two companies have agreed to collaborate on a new generation of memory technologies, including graphics and mobile memory, and potentially server and high-speed NAND flash chips, CNet reports.

While this represents a major payday for Rambus, there could be more to come. The company is still going after Micron, Hynix, and Nanya.

Nokia Throws Another Patent Infringement Punch at Apple

Bart Salisbury — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:05:10 -0600

Nokia has thrown another punch in its patent infringement fight with Apple, filing a new complaint against the maker of the iPhone with the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC). In this complaint Nokia alleges Apple’s iPhones, iPods, and computers infringe on seven Nokia patents. The filing with the USITC, an independent federal agency, expands Nokia’s claims against Apple to include unfair trade practices.

Last October Nokia filed its first complaint against Apple, in a federal court in Delaware, alleging the iPhone infringed on ten of Nokia’s patents. Apple countered Nokia’s filing with one of its own, claiming Nokia was violating 13 of Apple’s iPhone patents.

In a statement, Nokia said, “While our litigation in Delaware is about Apple's attempt to free-ride on the back of Nokia investment in wireless standards, the [US]ITC case filed today is about Apple's practice of building its business on Nokia's proprietary innovation.”

Nokia’s efforts to protect it’s $57.5 billion research and development investments, and 11,000 patents, comes at a time when Apple has surpassed Nokia in quarterly mobile phone profits, garnering $1.6 billion last quarter compared to $1.1 billion for Nokia.

Image Credit: Wayne Short/Wikimedia Commons

Could Microsoft's TomTom Suit Spell Trouble for Linux?

Pulkit Chandna — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 19:09:26 -0600

Microsoft recently slapped TomTom with a patent infringement suit. The Redmond-based tech behemoth has claimed that TomTom’s devices are in direct violation of eight of its patents.

Some fear Microsoft’s suit against TomTom may be a straw in the wind, as three of the claims are related to the use of the Linux kernel. Microsoft’s lawyer Horacio Gutierrez tried to dispel such misgivings. He told Cnet that the claims pertaining to the implementation of “file management techniques used in the Linux kernel” are only specific to TomTom.

He insisted that Microsoft is not going to mount a massive legal assault against the open-source community. Jim Zemlin, the Linux Foundation’s executive director, also feels that it is unfair to jump to conclusions about the scope of this lawsuit. Gutierrez and Zemlin certainly don’t think that Microsoft’s suit against TomTom is an indicant of trouble for the open-source community. What do you think?

Image Credit: Linux Devices

Legit and Illegitimate Streaming Music

Erin Simon — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:36:40 -0600

Two announcements Wednesday highlight the disconnect between copyright law and the market for copyrighted music. First, and unsuprisingly, music search site Seeqpod got sued for direct, contributory, and vicarious copyright infringement by Warner Music Group. The site allows visitors to search the internet for music and play it in a flash player embedded in the page of search results. Seeqpod doesn't host any infringing files itself, but it does create the impression that it is making those files available by direct-linking to them within its own interface.

Meanwhile, similar music website Last.fm began offering free streaming of most of the tracks in its catalogue. EMI, Sony, Universal, Warner, and thousands of indie labels and artists all authorized the move, which will give them a cut of Last.fm's ad revenue for every play. Each track will only be free for 3 listens a user, and then you'll get a message promoting the site's subscription service. The site had previously offered 30-second samples of some songs and free mp3s of some others.

Both sites are giving users easy and free access to songs on demand. One is technically not violating the copyright owner's exclusive reproduction or distribution right, by not hosting content itself (though the contributory and vicarious claims are stronger), but probably doesn't have the money to fight a lawsuit and will fold. The other got major content owners to support its venture by offering them a slice. In the end, users get unquestionably lawful on-demand music streaming. Law isn't always the answer – in Last.fm, rather than relying on expensive and risky litigation, the parties bargained to reach a solution that's good for everyone.