I disagree if the fine was $25 per song most people would think twice about illegally downloading a $1.00 song. $25.00 per song can add up very quickly.
A provision requiring the downloader to pay court costs and legal fees, if they unsucessfully contest the $25.00 a song fine would give the copyright holders incentive to pursue claims. Perhaps it should even be $50.00, but $750.00 is unconscienable, especailly when we are dealing with a minor, IMO.
I don’t advocate a system favoring the infringer. But the punishment has to fit the crime. Generally speaking, in civil cases, plaintiffs can only recover actual damages, plus court costs. The recording industry has been given special privilges to receive judgments that are 75,000% higher than their actual damages,(no doubt through some graft in the form of campaign contributions to congress) and IMHO this is wrong.
That's just not true. The statutory damages in any copyright infringement claim are between $750 and $30,000, unless the infringement was willful or innocent. The record industry doesn't have some special law. They follow the same rules as everyone else.
$750.00 is unconscienable, especailly when we are dealing with a minor, IMO.
How? The law is there for everyone to see. These people made a decision to steal the work of others, now they are paying. In this case, the girl shouldn't have filed an appeal; she would have walked away with a much smaller fine. Not only was she an infringer, she was stupid.