Volume II

Issue : 4: February 19, 2004

• FCC Decides Against Regulation of VoIP But Decides to Regulate Provision of Internet Access by Public Utilities
• Canadian Recording Industry Taking Action against Individual "Uploaders"
• U.S. Court of Appeals Reverses Application of Safe Harbour Liability Limitation for Copyright Infringement by AOL
• CIRA Transfers "mtv.ca" to MTV Television in Latest .Ca Domain Name Dispute Decision
• U.S. Federal Appeals Court Upholds Wine Ban
• U.S. - Australia Free Trade Agreement Strengthens Australian Copyright Laws
• Court Upholds Jury Award of $20 Million for Copyright Infringement in Newsletter Case
• Alberta Court Finds Online Defamation Warrants Increased Damage Award
• eBay Not Liable for Negative Feedback Posted by its Users

Home > Volume II > Issue 4: February 19, 2004 > Court Upholds Jury Award of $20 Million for Copyright Infringement in Newsletter Case

Court Upholds Jury Award of $20 Million for Copyright Infringement in Newsletter Case

The U.S. District Court (Maryland) has upheld a damage award for copyright infringement nearing $20 million. A jury awarded the damages in early October 2003 for the repeated unauthorized distribution of a copyrighted financial newsletter via an internal company Website. The Defendant, Legg Mason, had circulated the online financial newsletter Lowry's Market Trend Analysis, produced by the Plaintiff, Lowry's Reports, Inc., commencing in 1988 and continued to do so even after becoming aware of copyright violations in July 2001.

In response to the verdict and damages award, Legg Mason sought a new trial on the basis that the damages awarded in the case were "excessive, based on erroneous jury instructions, and contrary to the evidence". Legg Mason maintained that the actual harm in the case was limited to $59,000 and that the $19,725,270.00 jury awarded was "so disproportionate that it violates due process". The Court found that the jury's finding of willfulness was sustainable on the evidence, particularly considering that the Defendant was a sophisticated entity which continued infringing copyright even after being asked to cease and desist. Further, the Court found that the damages awarded by the jury under the U.S. Copyright Act are entitled to deference, especially where the award, as it was here, was within the statutory range.

For a copy of the decision, visit:
http://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/Opinions152/Opinions/01-3898.memorandum.pdf