352
Opinion of the Court
jury was required. See supra, at 349, 350.6 Moreover, actions to recover damages under the Copyright Act of 1831-- which differed from the Copyright Act of 1790 only in the amount (increased to $1 from 50 cents) authorized to be recovered for certain infringing sheets--were consistently tried to juries. See, e. g., Backus v. Gould, 7 How. 798, 802 (1849) ( jury awarded damages of $2,069.75); Reed v. Carusi, 20 F. Cas. 431, 432 (No. 11,642) (CC Md. 1845) ( jury awarded damages of $200); Millett v. Snowden, 17 F. Cas. 374, 375 (No. 9,600) (SDNY 1844) ( jury awarded damages of $625); Dwight v. Appleton, 8 F. Cas. 183, 185 (No. 4,215) (SDNY 1843) ( jury awarded damages of $2,000).
Columbia does not dispute this historical evidence. In fact, Columbia makes no attempt to draw an analogy between an action for statutory damages under § 504(c) and any historical cause of action--including those actions for monetary relief that we have characterized as equitable, such as actions for disgorgement of improper profits. See Team-sters v. Terry, 494 U. S. 558, 570-571 (1990); Tull v. United States, 481 U. S., at 424. Rather, Columbia merely contends that statutory damages are clearly equitable in nature.
We are not persuaded. We have recognized the "general rule" that monetary relief is legal, Teamsters v. Terry, supra, at 570, and an award of statutory damages may serve purposes traditionally associated with legal relief, such as compensation and punishment. See Curtis v. Loether, 415 U. S., at 196 (actual damages are "traditional form of relief offered in the courts of law"); Tull v. United States, 481 U. S., at 422
6 The Copyright Act of 1790 did not provide for equitable remedies at all, and in Stevens v. Gladding, 17 How. 447 (1855), we held that, even after Congress had provided for equity jurisdiction under the Copyright Act, see Act of Feb. 15, 1819, ch. 19, 3 Stat. 481, the statute's damages provision could not be enforced through a suit in equity. 17 How., at 455; see also Callaghan v. Myers, 128 U. S. 617, 663 (1888) (Stevens v. Gladding determined that "the penalties given by § 7 of the copyright act of 1831 cannot be enforced in a suit in equity").
Page: Index Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 NextLast modified: October 4, 2007