You are viewing a read-only archive of the Blogs.Harvard network. Learn more.

The Constitutional Argument Spreads: Capitol v. Thomas

We have said from the very start that Joel is just one of many people who have been thrown into the RIAA litigation machine. In October 2007, Jammie Thomas was found guilty on 24 counts of copyright infringement by a federal jury in Duluth, Minnesota. She was ordered to pay $224,000 in damages. But in September of this year, the presiding judge set aside the verdict and declared a mistrial.

It has recently come to our attention by way of Jammie’s counsel that a motion for a new trial (or alternatively, for remittitur) has been filed with the court. What’s significant — and heartening — is their argument.

Defendant’s singular grounds for the relief sought is that the amount of the
award is excessive and in violation of the Due Process Clause of the United States

You can read the text of the motion here.

We are not the only ones who now realize that the verdicts from these cases threaten fundamental rights guaranteed to all citizens under our Constitution.

Comments are closed.

Log in