Unfortunately this only seems to apply to individuals: companies seem to get slap-on-the-wrist fines were individuals get send-you-to-the-poverty-line fines.
Fines and damages are two different concepts, because one is about restoration (damages), while the other is about punishment and repentance. The first is about the victim, and the second is about the state.
In this case, the court decided on $650,000 damages to be repaid to the rights alliance, and as punishment gave a suspended jail sentence and 160 hours of community service.
> If the risk of getting caught is small the fine needs to he high enough that ChanceOfGettingCaught*Punishment is far enough from zero that it figures in people's minds.
Thats not the point of either fines or damages. In a historical perspective, fines exist because other more inhumane punishments like beating, lashing and shaming were deemed inappropriate. In today's theory, (see http://www.criminology.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.74227.1328107386!...), it's more about providing a standpoint in society about what is acceptable and what is not.
It should also be mentioned that fines have a maximum of $600 per crime, or 150 days of a person's current income.
Damages on the other hand are only about restoration, and is not allowed to be issued as punishment. It is illegal for the court to issue damages as a form of punishment.