The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit  ruled Tuesday that Joel Tenenbaum, a Boston University graduate student being sued for illegally sharing music, must pay his fine in full despite having waged a legal battle of appeals for six years.

The court at the John Joseph Moakley Courthouse in South Boston affirmed a decision from the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts claiming a jury’s award of $675,000 to Sony Corporation of America did not violate Tenenbaum’s constitutional right to due process, according to court documents released Tuesday.

In 2007, Sony sued Tenenbaum for illegally downloading and distributing thirty files of music between 1999 and 2007.

The district court held that Tenenbaum violated the Copyright Act, and was thus fined based on the nature of his offense, according to the First Circuit Court’s ruling.

Tenenbaum argued and appealed that the size of the award was unconstitutional because it did not correlate with the damages he caused to the music industry, which he estimated to be no more than $450.

“The jury awarded Sony $22,500 for each of Tenenbaum’s thirty violations, for a total award of $675,000,” the ruling stated. “Tenenbaum moved for a reduction in the award, arguing that remittitur was appropriate and that the award was so high that it violated his right to due process.”

However, the district court overruled the remittitur — a ruling by a judge that would reduce the amount of damages owed in a civil case. Tenenbaum then appealed the decision on the constitutionality of the fine.

Tenenbaum’s appeal presents two critical questions, which were reviewed in regards to past rulings of similar cases, according to the ruling.

“First, what is the correct standard for evaluating the constitutionality of an award of statutory damages under the Copyright Act? Second, did the award of $675,000 violate Tenenbaum’s right to due process constitutionality of the damage award, but not the decision on remittitur?” the ruling asked.

Although the award is significantly higher than the damages reaped by Tenenbaum’s actions, statutory damages under the Copyright Act are meant to both compensate for losses as well as discourage such violations in the future, according to the ruling.

The ruling stated despite warnings by government officials, Tenenbaum continued to illegally download music over several years. Thus, First Circuit officials have refused to rule in favor of Tenenbaum’s appeal.

“On appeal, Tenenbaum invites us to assume that he is ‘the most heinous of noncommercial copyright infringers,’” the ruling stated. “We need not go so far as to accept his offer.”