The plaintiff sold his photography online. He sued defendants for copyright infringement. He believed that the defendants had obtained his photos illegally and placed one of these photographs, without the plaintiff's permission, on a commercial Internet website they operated. After the defendants ignored a letter by the plaintiff demanding that the online photos be taken down, the plaintiff filed a copyright infringement case seeking $30,000 in damages. The owner also alleged that the defendants' conduct constituted a willful violation of his copyrights.
The court considered the following factors in determining whether a damages remedy existed: the infringer's state of mind; the expenses saved by the infringer; the revenue lost by the copyright holder; the deterrent effect on the infringer and third parties; the infringer's cooperation in the case; and the attitude and conduct of the parties. Based on the allegations stated above, do you believe that these factors merit a damages reward of $30,000? In whose favor do you believe the court ruled? Explain your reasoning. [Oppenheimer v. Holt, No. 1:14-CV-000208-MR, 2015 WL 2062189 (W.D.N.C. May 4, 2015).]