Monday, June 1, 2009

Labels to Jammie Thomas: you're not that innocent

The record label plaintiffs have moved in limine to preclude Jammie Thomas' proposed "innocent infringer" defense under 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)(2). The defense provides that where the "infringer was not aware and had no reason to believe that his or her acts constituted an infringement of copyright, the court in its discretion may reduce the award of statutory damages to a sum of not less than $200." The labels argue: 1) Thomas waived the defense by not raising it in her answer; and 2) the defense is unavailable under 17 U.S.C. § 402(d) because they affixed proper copyright notices to their works.

And besides, she's just not that innocent...

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments here are moderated. I appreciate substantive comments, whether or not they agree with what I've written. Stay on topic, and be civil. Comments that contain name-calling, personal attacks, or the like will be rejected. If you want to rant about how evil the RIAA and MPAA are, and how entertainment companies' employees and attorneys are bad people, there are plenty of other places for you to go.