Supreme court rules against Grokster and Streamcast

27 Jun 05 19:37 by Crabbyappleton in category Uncategorized To news archive

Siting
the rampant misuse of filesharing apps, coupled with the absence of filtering
tools to stop illegal sharing of copyrighted works, the Supreme Court today sided with the copyright holders. It appears that the software companies are now liable for the actions of the end users of their products.

src="http://www.cdfreaks.com/contentimages/newsimages/1031632297" align=right border=0
>The Supreme Court unanimously ruled today that Internet file-sharing services such as Grokster can be held liable if it touts its service as a way for users to illegally download music or movies.

The court sided 9-0 with Hollywood over Silicon Valley in the major technology ruling, stating that Grokster and StreamCast Networks “are aware that users employ their software primarily to download copyrighted files” and marketed themselves as a legal alternative to Napster, the ground-breaking file-sharing service that the courts effective shut down in 2001 for copyright infringement.

“The unlawful objective is unmistakable,” Justice David Souter wrote for the unanimous court. He said that “one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement . . . is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties.”

You can read the entire article at the Mercury News at this link. Please come back and give us your thoughts as to the possible implications for the future of filesharing.

Source: Mercury News

16 Comments

kamikazee
Posts: 1155
Posted on: 27 Jun 05 20:50
Re-read the first paragraph, nothing has changed. The MPAA or RIAA have to prove that Grokster or p2p intended their software to be used for illegal purposes this ruling just left everything as it is, it changed nothing, just sidestepped making a prudent ruling. Grokster or p2p in particular can still exist as long as they continue to discourage users for using it for illegal purposes. The MPAA and RIAA still have to prove that p2p was developed to conduct or condone illegal services, they still have to prove intent, which still goes back to the user of p2p.
shimman
Posts: 596
Posted on: 27 Jun 05 21:17
grokster won both district & 9th circuit, but failed on sc. what can i say....america, yeah!!! :d ps i hope those fellow americans who voted for bush are happy now; i am really thinking to change my party line from rep to dem
dentman42
Posts: 655
Posted on: 27 Jun 05 21:21
It was the dems that gave us the DMCA to begin with...
shimman
Posts: 596
Posted on: 27 Jun 05 21:23
the decision is a blow to p2p users as it is decided that makers are liable for producing any devices/software that are intented for violating copyrights. because of this, makers can be threatened by copyrights cartel to adapt DRMs; maybe there will be another decision that without the DRM, makers are liable because non-DRMed products can encourage users to violate copyrights. broadcast flags can be forced similar way by copyright cartel. i make copies of dvd movies i own and use the copied disk to play them just because i don't want to damage the original disks & i don't want to see freaking ADs & FBI warnings
Roj
Posts: 434
Posted on: 27 Jun 05 21:30
What did you expect? Fairness? From a "justice" (I use the term loosely) system totally owned by big business? Puhlleeeze. Just keep doing what you're doing and ignoring them - as one person already pointed out, nothing has changed. Nor will it on either side.
VioletHue
Posts: 49
Posted on: 27 Jun 05 23:48
So now ALL technological innovative products will be released first and only overseas. There will be little pools of green stagnant DRMA products that are all but useless in there bulky protection schemes available in the USA. All the really cool, sophisticated, and desirable gadgets and software will be distributed in the rest of the world and the USA will be like a bunch of old grannys sitting around watching the rest of the world go by.
greensabath
Posts: 47
Posted on: 28 Jun 05 05:46
I feel that this desision actually helps out consumers. We in the US no longer have to fear the "rath" of the RIAA. They will now go back to suing the P2P companies. But the good thing is, is that we can always find somewhere to get our music or movies because the RIAA or MPAA can't shut down services that are overseas.
sorti
Posts: 281
Posted on: 28 Jun 05 05:46
Everything is made in China anyway. So where do you live where there are no laws to protect the artists? US laws become world laws for some reason, I wish that was not the case but for some reason it does seem to happen that way. Spend the money you would spend on CD or DVDs by supporting https://secure.eff.org/ instead.
sorti
Posts: 281
Posted on: 28 Jun 05 05:52
So does this mean gun manufactures are in trouble in the high court now? Because I hear the users of their hardware have been killing people.
kain
Posts: 60
Posted on: 28 Jun 05 07:01
Only in America can it be legal for stores to sell bongs (something that has absolutely no LEGAL use) but a company who makes a p2p program that could have some legal uses can be sued into the ground. Wake up America...it doesn't matter if it's a Republican or a Democrat...both sides are OWNED by big businesses.
Siswell
Posts: 173
Posted on: 28 Jun 05 13:34
Can't help thinking, who cares? Groskters been near death for ages now. I know theres a nock effect for other software but as the latest stuff doesn't require servers its in a different category and will have to go through the same legal stuff again . . . plus as everyone knows the best p2p is eMule which is German so i wont be loosing any sleep at night
burnmaster00
Posts: 6
Posted on: 28 Jun 05 14:08
Siswell - it's not that we care about grokster, but its more that the supreme court ruled against filesharing. If they have done it once, they can do it again...
masterbw
Posts: 83
Posted on: 28 Jun 05 21:52
Well, it seems there will always be some people who favor in this decision while some others are not. Anyhow, we all need to respect the majority especially the supreme court's decision, after all, they have nothing to do with whoever's in charge of the white house. And in my personal opinion, P2P is illegal, obviously. But who cares, we still do it anyway, don't we?
horrido
Posts: 19
Posted on: 29 Jun 05 02:40
Nothing to do with who's in the white house? Who do you think appoints them. The repugs have been in power for most of my life, and I'm 43yo. You are in la la land if you think thats dems are more controlling than the repugs. THis ruling is all about rebulican bif buisiness control at the cost of your freedom. With two justices set to be replaced in the next few years, the already right leaning supreme court will shift even farther right. THEY HAVE LIFE TIME APPOINTMENTS PEOPLE. Wake up!
jasaiyajin
Posts: 67
Posted on: 29 Jun 05 09:50
Isn't it entirely possible, the Supreme court is a bought commodity? Decisions are getting more and more leaning toward money. Ohh, the humanity, spoiled by (insert your money type here).
masterbw
Posts: 83
Posted on: 30 Jun 05 01:48
They have life time job that means no one can touch them so their decisions are not biased. Have faith bro. If it's a bad decision, it will be overruled later when the next judge thinks the other way.

Post a comment

Hello guest,
default
To benefit from all extra features you need to log in or sign up.
signup log in

Most popular headlines

Diablo 3 game fans hit with always-online DRM grief (4)

  • Fri 18 May 20:04 by Seán
  • Software

it appears that Blizzard underestimated the server capacity required to handle all the gamers, thus resulting in Battle.net servers being overloaded and taken offline at launch. As Diablo III requires the user to be logged in with an uninterrupted internet connection to play, most players were greeted with an "Error 37" on the day of launch, unable to play the game.

CD Projekt says the truth is, DRM doesn't work (2)

  • Mon 21 May 22:48 by Seán
  • Piracy

In an interview between Forbes and CD Projekt CEO Marcin Iwinski, Iwinski said the truth is that DRM simply does not work. He said the main problem is that the copy protection is cracked within hours of the release of every game, not to mention the money and development wasted to implement it. Those with pirated versions also have a clean and more functional game!

Why not? PNY announces USB drive with whistle (10)

It could be possible that there is a scenario where you would have loved to be able to whistle on your USB stick, but we really wonder when. To make

FBI to start special service to spy on online communication (1)

Cnet claims that the FBI, the intellige

See all headlines

Active Commenters