• by Wendy Davis  @wendyndavis, February 9, 2010

The record labels are arguing that grad student Joel Tenenbaum's request that the judge reduce a $675,000 damage award for file-sharing is "ridiculous" and should be rejected.

"Tenenbaum is a long-term, hardcore, and willful copyright infringer whose misconduct caused plaintiffs to suffer incalculable harm," the Recording Industry Association of America asserts in court papers filed this week in federal district court in Boston.

Last year, a jury found that Tenenbaum infringed copyright on 30 tracks and ordered him to pay $22,500 per song. The federal statute provides for damages ranging from $750 to $150,000 per infringement.

Tenenbaum recently asked U.S. District Court Judge Nancy Gertner to order a new trial or reduce the damage award, which he called "so severe and oppressive as to be wholly disproportionate to his offense."

Among other arguments, he says that damages should be reduced to the minimum -- which would come to $22,500 -- because he had no profit motive.

The RIAA counters that Gertner "lacks the authority to interfere with a jury award that falls within the statutory range established by Congress." What's more, the group says, Tenenbaum's case "represents a textbook example of where it would be entirely inappropriate" to reduce an award.

"The jury in this case heard evidence demonstrating that Tenenbaum willfully infringed plaintiffs' copyrights in thirty sound recordings by downloading them and distributing them to millions of other users on Kazaa ... that he intentionally seeded these networks with new copies of works, that he engaged in this conduct for nearly ten years with full knowledge that it was illegal and despite repeated warnings to stop, that he continued to infringe even during the course of the lawsuit, and that he perjured himself and concealed material evidence of his infringement," the RIAA argues.

Tenenbaum is one of only two people sued for file-sharing to have a jury trial. In the other case, a jury found that Jammie Thomas-Rasset had infringed on copyright by sharing 23 tracks and assessed damages of $1.92 million. The judge in that case slashed damages to $2,250 a track, or $54,000 total.

The RIAA then attempted to settle the matter if Thomas-Rasset would agree to pay $25,000 to charity and to not oppose a request that the judge withdraw his opinion reducing damages, but Thomas-Rasset refused. In light of her refusal, the RIAA this week requested a new trial just on the question of damages.