01-3009 U.S. v. Chay

Listen to this article

“By focusing on his personal ‘gain’ rather than the calculation of the victims’ loss, Mr. Chay fails to address the real issue posed by the statutory scheme: whether the district court’s calculation of the amount of loss Mr. Chay caused the victims was within the bounds of its discretion. Mr. Chay’s position is somewhat analogous to a bank robber asking that the amount of money he returns to a bank be offset by the cost of robbing it. We do not think the holder of the copyright ought to be required to subsidize the cost of Mr. Chay’s illegal activity. Although the record in this case is sparse, we note that any other approach might well require a victim to incur double costs if, in addition to absorbing the costs of the malefactor, it had to absorb the costs associated with the failure to sell its own product in the regular course of doing business.

“We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in calculating restitution based on Mr. Chay’s gross sales.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, Crabb, J., Ripple, J.