On CHOW: This beer is perfect
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

By John Borland
Posted on ZDNet News: Dec 10, 2004 11:34:00 PM

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday said it would hear a controversial case on whether file-sharing software companies could be held legally responsible for copyright infringement on their networks.

The court's action is good news for big record labels and Hollywood studios, which have lost successive rulings on the issue in lower courts. They want software companies like Morpheus parent StreamCast Networks and Grokster to be held legally responsible when copyrighted material is swapped using their software.

"There are seminal issues before the court--the future of the creative industries and legitimate Internet commerce," Mitch Bainwol, chief executive officer of the Recording Industry Association of America, said in a statement. "These are questions not about a particular technology, but the abuse of that technology by practitioners of a parasitical business model."

The court's decision could also be a sobering sign for technology companies well outside the world of file-swapping. At the core of the case is an interpretation of a 20-year-old decision that made VCRs legal despite their ability to copy TV shows and movies, which ultimately helped pave the way for a host of technologies ranging from CD burners to Apple Computer's iPod.

That case, known as the Sony-Betamax decision, set out rough guidelines under which technology used to make illegal copies of copyrighted material could be distributed without the manufacturer being responsible for the resulting piracy, as long as the product was also capable of "substantial noninfringing uses."

That's been enormously influential for computer and consumer electronics makers over the past few years, particularly as music and movies have been turned into easily copied digital formats. Indeed, all MP3 player makers, including Apple, owe their recent history to a 1999 decision in which a judge said MP3 players were capable of playing legally purchased music, and were therefore legal.

"I don't think anybody had a clue how significant that decision was when it came out," said Jim Brelsford, an attorney at Jones Day. "So many things turned out to be built on that."

Some in Silicon Valley fear that a Supreme Court ruling aimed at reining in file-swapping could have unintended impacts on future product development.

"There's a lot more at stake here for the technology industry than for the copyright industry," said Fred von Lohmann, an Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney who has represented StreamCast Networks on the issue. "This case will not be determinant of the future of peer to peer around the world, but it will be determinant of the future of a whole host of future digital products."

The case itself focuses on Morpheus and Grokster, each of which are popular file-swapping applications that are widely used to trade movies, music and software.

Studios and labels sued the companies in 2001, following successful legal campaigns against peer-to-peer trailblazer Napster. Attorneys for the entertainment conglomerates said the newer file-swapping services were, like Napster, building businesses based on copyright infringement.

But Grokster and StreamCast were built around a different technology than Napster. Their services involved a highly decentralized network of individual computers trading files among themselves, rather than a network controlled from a central location.

Lower court judges ultimately said that the companies did not directly control what happens on their networks, and that their software could be used for legal purposes. That shields the companies themselves from legal responsibility for the actions of their users, the lower courts said.

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 126 Talkback(s)
No problem. Its not like Emule is a 100% legal environment.
Nor is it 100% illeagle. I do prefer indifference over dedicated piracy (BitTorrent has more groups and less selectivity overall and therfore more dedicated piracy).... (Read the rest)
Posted by: GreatInca Posted on: 12/21/04 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
Good News??  Letophoro | 12/10/04
It's spin...  AbsolutelyNot | 12/10/04
I doubt it... There IS a reason they are reviewing it.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/11/04
re : I doubt it... There IS a reason they are reviewing it.  JasonL31 | 12/11/04
And your point is what? They can't ask the courts?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/11/04
For someone that has been consistently wrong....  AmusedAtItAll | 12/11/04
Uh huh, the Supreme Court has nothing else to do.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
As an aside: I heard a justice is to announce retirement today  DigitalKid | 12/13/04
then why are they hearing the case?  cybershoplifter | 12/13/04
Re: Good news  d_jedi | 12/10/04
I suppose so.  Letophoro | 12/10/04
You have it completely backwards.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/11/04
I was robbed a couuple years back  JasonL31 | 12/11/04
Maybe yes...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/11/04
axey wrong, as usual  AmusedAtItAll | 12/11/04
Your limited reasoning ablility has lead you astray.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
Insulting him does nothing to bolster your side  mds_z | 12/13/04
How's that?  Spoon Jabber | 12/13/04
If the organize crime (RIAA/MPAA) win, everything will become illegal  Mectron | 12/10/04
So now you run the Supreme Court? Don't think so.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/10/04
I See No Reason To Revisit It, You Will Never Stop It Completely  itanalyst | 12/10/04
You aren't the Supreme Court. Your need to re-vist doesn't matter.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/10/04
noax - this is about softmoney donations  JasonL31 | 12/11/04
I know no such thing. Your proof please...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/11/04
So now you run the Supreme Court? Don't think so  AmusedAtItAll | 12/11/04
Not a bit.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
No problem. Its not like Emule is a 100% legal environment.  GreatInca | 12/21/04
Excellent  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/10/04
It's not really a grey area..  d_jedi | 12/10/04
Obvipusly the Supreme Court doesn't agree with you.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/10/04
Well..  d_jedi | 12/10/04
You need to argue with the court, not me.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/10/04
Wrong..  d_jedi | 12/11/04
And I find your comment a bit disingenuous.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/11/04
Well..  d_jedi | 12/11/04
My bad...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/11/04
Well..  d_jedi | 12/12/04
the people swapping the files - should be held accountable for their action  htotten | 12/12/04
Yes, and identifying them should be a priority.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
Close but...  htotten | 12/12/04
Not worried about it.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
As long as..  d_jedi | 12/12/04
Actually  AbsolutelyNot | 12/13/04
Substantial non-infringing uses  toadlife | 12/10/04
My opinion?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/10/04
What information?  toadlife | 12/10/04
Uses yes, "substancial", that remains to be seen.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/10/04
and the media companies want to kill it because it *IS* posible  JasonL31 | 12/11/04
Again, show me your proof of your claims.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/11/04
This pot head loves his weed  ahkjmu@... | 12/12/04
No_Ax again has no clue  AbsolutelyNot | 12/13/04
The usual result of bitty's shilling is it backfires on him.  AmusedAtItAll | 12/11/04
TrollCatcher, re-write your post.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
Mote, meet beam  rapson | 12/14/04
There are several  htotten | 12/12/04
Many uses for marijuana, it's still illegal.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
Hey Ax, I'm answering you here  htotten | 12/12/04
Well  johnnyu | 12/12/04
That is why I offered a REAL solution.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
Prediction  Spoon Jabber | 12/13/04
Again, no knowledge of the law  AbsolutelyNot | 12/13/04
Substantial, yes  wresnick | 12/13/04
http://www.iespell.com  AbsolutelyNot | 12/13/04
This is going to be good .. (I hope).  ParadigmOdyssey | 12/10/04
It will be bad (for p2p)  Nullifidian | 12/10/04
Emule will do just fine. Can't say same for Edonkey, Kazaa & ShareBear.  GreatInca | 12/21/04
RIAA's real problem now is Microsoft, Apple, Sony, HP, and Comcast  chrislovesdana | 12/10/04
Or, it plays into their hands nicely...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/10/04
Locks  Letophoro | 12/10/04
Message has been deleted.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/10/04
Now that's just typical.  Letophoro | 12/11/04
No insult meant at all.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
correction: I did mean to insult you.  ahkjmu@... | 12/12/04
Ooh,, you're smart  d_jedi | 12/12/04
It sure read that way though.  Letophoro | 12/13/04
Letophoro  AbsolutelyNot | 12/13/04
Big if  Yagotta B. Kidding | 12/13/04
P2P ain't stoppin. Monopolies & Poprietary-ness will increse its demand  GreatInca | 12/21/04
ZDNet, why are you buring the story on the Sharman trial?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/10/04
This ain't Rocket Science...  realitycheck101 | 12/10/04
(nt)troll  toadlife | 12/10/04
The court should not be making law  Robertbrice | 12/10/04
They aren't, they are revisiting the term "substancial".  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/11/04
when ms was working with the media companies  JasonL31 | 12/11/04
Was that an attempt at wit?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/11/04
Oh Jason, I got it!!!  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/11/04
Pot, Kettle, black (nt)  Letophoro | 12/11/04
majority of content on P2P is copyrighted  htotten | 12/12/04
exactly  johnnyu | 12/12/04
ZDNET TO CLOSE DOWN NEWS  hipparchus2000 | 12/12/04
sharing html  htotten | 12/12/04
exactly!: when is a PC a "server" and when is it a "desktop"  hipparchus2000 | 12/12/04
there isn't actually a lot of difference  htotten | 12/12/04
Sorry, you are dead wrong.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
What do you mean?  htotten | 12/12/04
I hope this gets shot down in flames!  htotten | 12/12/04
That's why I offer real solutions.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
I didn't see this. Thanx for the reference but  htotten | 12/12/04
Heck, we make it simple then.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/13/04
A good bribe always works!  reconredneck | 12/12/04
Well  johnnyu | 12/12/04
ummm, judges are NOT elected.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/12/04
come on  NitricEster | 12/12/04
The worry is that P2P will be banned.....  htotten | 12/12/04
I had no idea..  NitricEster | 12/12/04
As an administrator-  AbsolutelyNot | 12/13/04
You got it.  htotten | 12/13/04
No ne is suggesting shutting down P2P.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/13/04
Must first be defined  Spoon Jabber | 12/13/04
Well technically you are wrong - local judges are..  DigitalKid | 12/13/04
A ban on the soft is impossible and useless  Robertbrice | 12/12/04
No, I don't agree.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/13/04
And more will follow  AbsolutelyNot | 12/13/04
Sorry for being a know it all.  ahkjmu@... | 12/12/04
How long did it take you...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/13/04
You know what they say...  rapson | 12/13/04
True, but what a sad little person it is.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/13/04
Tyranny of the majority  rapson | 12/13/04
Sounds like  Spoon Jabber | 12/13/04
Re: Tyranny of the majority  Root User | 12/13/04
Then it sounds like...  rapson | 12/13/04
Not to point out the obvious  AbsolutelyNot | 12/13/04
Forgot to add  AbsolutelyNot | 12/13/04
Yet another copy?  B.O.F.H. | 12/13/04
I think it DOES help  Spoon Jabber | 12/13/04
BitTorrent  Yagotta B. Kidding | 12/13/04

What do you think?

advertisement
Click Here
advertisement

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

Click Here