Columbia Pictures Television in 1991 violated multiple license agreements for television series. These series were aired on three TV stations that all belonged to C. Elvin Feltner. The violations occurred because of Feltner’s act regarding delinquent fees, but this did not hinder Feltner’s station’s airing of the series’. Columbia sued Feltner over copyright infringement. Columbia tried to get statutory damages under Copyright Act. Columbia won the case against Feltner and was awarded statutory damages.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the Copyright Act and the Seventh Amendment did not provide rights for a jury trial on statutory damages. Columbia Pictures Television won the Court of Appeals. The Copyright Act does not allow for a jury trial if the copyright owner wants to recover statutory damage. Section 504 (c), states that instead of a jury determining how much statutory damages should be paid, the Court may decide the amount they think is appropriate. If the Court considers the case to be one of copyright infringement, whether it is intentional or not, they can increase or decrease statutory damages. The Court does not have a jury. Therefore, the components are only able to be considered the Judge. The Copyright Act doesn’t use this term for delivering decisions about actual damage or profits. Feltner relying only on the Constitutional question was a surprise to him. Even though the copyright law does not give the basic right for a juror to hear statutory damages cases, the Seventh Amendment allows for a jury trial to determine the amount of statutory damages. Despite the fact that the statute does not address the issue, the Seventh Amendment allows for a jury trial. It also gives the jury the power to decide the amount. While there is no common law that demonstrates the dire need to have a jury trial, citizens have had the right to fair judgment since the British court. Columbia had claimed that statutory damages are equitable, so the Seventh Amendment was not applicable and a jury trial was unnecessary. Columbia Pictures argued that statutory damages were equitable and therefore a jury trial was necessary in order to preserve common-law rights. The awarding of statutory damage may serve traditional purposes such as punishment and compensation. The Court ruled that Feltner, despite Section 504 of Copyright Act’s silence was allowed to stand trial before a juror. This included the right of the jury to determine the amount statutory damages. Justice Clarence Thomas continued to speak to the historical facts behind the Seventh Amendment. He said that there was clear historical evidence that juries set the amount of damages for successful plaintiffs.
The jury awarded $72,000 in statutory damage for each work infringed on following this decision. The Judge awarded $31.68 million dollars in total, which is three-and-half times what he would have given at the bench trial. Feltner argued that Supreme Court rulings claiming statutory damage were invalid and unconstitutional. This argument was rejected by the court of appeals and the jury award of $31.68million was approved. Feltner attempted to make a second attempt at being heard by the Supreme Court. The attempt to hear Feltner again at the Supreme Court was unsuccessful.
