Joel Tenenbaum must pay $675,000 (£426,000) in damages awarded to the major US music labels after his request for a retrial was turned down.
In the US a jury can set a fine of up to $150,000 for every occasion of wilful copyright infringement, meaning that Mr Tenenbaum's fine is below the maximum he could have received for the 31 songs he was found guilty of illegally sharing.
This doesn't make sense to me. If it is a "fine" from the government, then the music industry shouldn't see a single penny from the money, however the first statement says it's money direct to the music industry as if the RIAA is sueing the defendant.
In which case can the music industry prove how much money they lost to his alleged sharing, and how many people the songs that HE specifically released downloaded resulting in said loss of income?