Information AboutGrokster |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT GROKSTER | |
| file sharing programs | |
| defunct software companies | |
|
THE TECHNOLOGY There are three "major" and the Intellectual Property laws is a matter of debate. {Link without Title} A SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT The key issue in this Copyright Infringement case is the so-called ''Sony safe-harbor'' principle which was set by the Supreme Court twenty-one years ago in Sony v. Universal Studios 464 U.S. 417 (1984). This states that, "…the sale of copying equipment, like the sale of other articles of commerce, does not constitute contributory infringement if the product is widely used for legitimate, unobjectionable purposes. Indeed, it need merely be capable of substantial non-infringing uses." (Sony 464 U.S. at 442). Grokster argues that proof of reasonable, actual or potential, non-infringing use, is sufficient to fulfil the ""substantiality"" requirement. The RIAA and MPAA argue that Sony safe-harbor requires proof that the non-infringing use is the primary one; an incidental non-infringing use is not enough. Among the Amicus Curiae briefs:
SUPREME COURT DECISION LEADS TO SHUTDOWN Grokster closed its site on November 7, 2005. A note on its home page cited a United States Supreme Court ruling that copying copyrighted material using "unauthorized peer-to-peer services is illegal" and while legal download services exist, "this service is not one of them." It also claims to have logged your IP address, which most web servers do by default. The company said it hoped to establish a "legal" service soon, referencing a new URL: www.grokster3g.com. THE HISTORY OF THE CASE IN THE U.S. COURTS In April 2003 , Los Angeles federal court judge, Stephen Wilson, ruled in favour of Grokster and Streamcast (providers of Morpheus P2P software) against the Recording Industry Association Of America and the Motion Picture Industry and held that their file sharing software was not illegal. On 20 August 2003 , the decision was appealed by the RIAA and the MPAA. On 17 August 2004 , the United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit issued a partial ruling supporting Grokster, holding This appeal presents the question of whether distributors of peer-to-peer file-sharing computer networking software may be held contributorily or vicariously liable for copyright infringements by users. Under the circumstances presented by this case, we conclude that the defendants are not liable for contributory and vicarious copyright infringement and affirm the district court's partial grant of summary judgment. In '' on 29 March , 2005 , and in June 2005, the Court unanimously held that Grokster could indeed be sued for infringement for their activities prior to the date of this judgment. But the future impact of the case may only be to require software companies to more carefully advertise their packages to discourage illegal downloading. SEE ALSO MGM Studios, Inc. V. Grokster, Ltd. EXTERNAL LINKS
|
|
|