The article discusses a court ruling related to enhanced damages in copyright infringement cases, where damages can dramatically exceed typical caps. A jury could erroneously award these high damages if it viewed Cox's actions in not terminating infringing users as willful. Additionally, Sony's appeal was rejected, as it failed to prove that Cox profited from user infringements, drawing parallels to fixed rent landlords. The ruling emphasizes the challenges in pursuing direct infringers online, highlighting the complex relationship between service providers and copyright law.
Enhanced damages can be $150,000 per work, instead of the usual cap of $30,000.
The court correctly held that Sony had not satisfied its burden of showing that Cox financially benefited from infringement on its network.
Cox charges its customers a flat fee for Internet service, regardless of what its users do online.
Sauer compared Cox to a landlord who charges a fixed rent regardless of what tenants use the leased premises for.
Collection
[
|
...
]