BU Student Ordered to Destroy Files, But Can't Be Silenced

Unless you're a totally copyright nerd like me, you may not having been following the case of Joel Tenebaum, a Boston University student that was order to pay $675K to four labels for downloading 30 songs.

Yesterday, BostonChannel.com reported that the judge presiding over the case order Tenebaum to destroy all of the infringing files, but would not grant the RIAA's request that Tenebaum be prohibiting from speaking out against copyright laws and his belief in file sharing, based on this wacky, old federal law call the First Amendment. Those nutty judges.

I don't have too much to say about this case except that the amount of "damages" is clearly over-the-top, and that you can't get blood from a stone. To me, the spirit of statutory damages clause in the Copyright Act (allowing up to a $150K fine for one violation) was meant to stop commercial pirates and widespread distributors of materials covered by copyright; not grad students. Perhaps I am mistaken. The judge in the case, Nancy Gerter, urged Congress to consider changing the copyright law. I have mixed feelings about this myself; arguably, the courts have discretion to interpret the Act for digital distributions. On the other hand, have written law covering P2P and other new methods of file sharing could be helpful, but only if Congress truly digests how people are distributing music online and what truly violates not only the text, but the spirit of copyright protection. I'm not sure that Congress is there yet.

Tenebaum's attorney said they would be submitting a motion for a new trial by January 4th. God's speed, my friend.