In 1991, Columbia Pictures Television violated licensing agreements for multiple television series. These series aired on three television stations, all owned by C. Elvin Feltner. The violations occurred due to Feltner's default, but did not prevent Feltner's station from airing the television series. This led Columbia to sue Feltner for copyright infringement. Columbia then attempted to recover statutory damages under the Copyright Act. Feltner was denied the right to a jury trial, and Columbia was successful in obtaining statutory damages. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The Court of Appeals held that neither the Copyright Act nor the Seventh Amendment provided the right to a jury trial regarding statutory damages. In favor of Columbia Pictures Television, the Court of Appeals held that there is no legal right in the Copyright Act to a jury trial when the copyright owner wishes to recover statutory damages. Section 504© states that instead of a jury determining the amount of statutory damages to be awarded, the Court will set the amount as it sees fit. If the Court views the case as a deliberate or innocent copyright infringement, it can increase or decrease the value of the statutory damages. Without a jury within the Court, the members can only be seen as Judge. However, the Copyright Act does not use that term when making decisions about actual damages and profits. To his dismay, Feltner's only reliance was on addressing the constitutional question. Although copyright law does not guarantee the fundamental right to have a jury try statutory damages, the Seventh Amendment claims the right to trial by jury on all aspects of awarding statutory damages, namely the amount. Although the statue is silent on the point, the Seventh Amendment includes the right to a jury trial, thus enshrining the right to have a jury assess the amount of statutory damages. The case was overturned. Although the common law does not demonstrate the desperate need for a jury trial, providing citizens with a fair judgment has been a practice in our nation since the days of the Court of Equity in Great Britain. Columbia had argued that statutory damages were fair, so the Seventh Amendment did not apply and the need for a jury trial was nonexistent. In opposition to Columbia Pictures' argument, a jury trial is necessary to maintain common law rights. The award of statutory damages can distribute purposes traditionally associated with statutory relief, such as compensation and punishment. The Court's final decision found that, despite the silence of section 504 of the Copyright Act, Feltner had been granted the right to a jury trial. This included the right to a jury decision as to the amount of statutory damages. Holding true to the historical evidence underlying the Seventh Amendment, Justice Clarence Thomas concluded that "there is clear and direct historical evidence that juries, both generally and in copyright cases, set the amount of damages awarded to a plaintiff winner". He further anticipated that this conclusion should lead the jury to determine the full amount of statutory damages under Section 504©, in order to remain faithful to the production that is the common law of the jury trial. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a custom essay Following this decision, the.