Cases: LaMacchia

United States of America vs. David M. LaMacchia

• Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Indictment for Failure to State an Offense and On Constitutional Grounds, September 30, 1994
• Memorandum in Support of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Indictment for Failure to State an Offense and On Constitutional Grounds, September 30, 1994
• Reply to Government's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, November 4, 1994

Our client, David LaMacchia, figured in what turned out to be a landmark case delimiting the methods that the federal government may use to prosecute computer-related activity that is not clearly the subject of criminal legislation. The case tested the power of the government to engage in "creative" interpretations of existing federal criminal statutes, in an effort to outlaw some computer-related activity that the Congress had not yet chosen to criminalize.

LaMacchia was indicted by a Boston federal grand jury for conspiracy to commit wire fraud while he was an undergraduate student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The indictment charged that LaMacchia had conspired with various unidentified persons who had, with LaMacchia's free assistance, made use of MIT's computers via the internet to download copies of copyrighted software without paying royalties to the holders of the softwares' copyright owners.

LaMacchia was charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud. He was not charged with criminal copyright infringement because, as of that time, the latter offense required proof that the infringer acted for financial gain. To do what LaMacchia did without financial gain was not, in fact, a criminal violation of federal copyright laws as they then existed. There was no evidence that LaMacchia had sought or obtained any financial gain from his actions.

A motion to dismiss LaMacchia's indictment was filed. The motion argued that, assuming that LaMacchia gave people free assistance which enabled them to download copies of copyrighted software without paying royalties, this was not a conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Copyright infringement engaged in without seeking or obtaining any financial gain, it was argued, was not prohibited by the criminal copyright statute, and hence it was neither covered nor prohibited by the wire fraud statute which does not cover copyright infringement at all. The use of a general criminal statute as a basis for a prosecution, where the more specific statute covering the field does not outlaw the particular activity, is an abuse of the government's power, it was argued.

Judge Richard Stearns of the federal district court in Boston agreed with the defense. He ruled that the goverment was improperly attempting "to pour new wine into an old bottle", and dismissed the indictment. The government, after indicating that it might appeal, in the end did not appeal.

Subsequent to and as a result of the outcome of the LaMacchia case, Congress amended the criminal copyright statute so that it currently punishes copyright infringement, whether or not the infringer seeks or obtains financial gain, so long as infringement causes more than $5,000 in damage to the copyright holder.

©2005 Good & Cormier