Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

File-Sharing Services May Be Sued

Filed under
Legal

Internet file-sharing services will be held responsible if they intend for their customers to use software primarily to swap songs and movies illegally, the Supreme Court ruled Monday, rejecting warnings that the lawsuits will stunt growth of cool tech gadgets such as the next iPod.

The unanimous decision sends the case back to lower court, which had ruled in favor of file-sharing services Grokster Ltd. and StreamCast Networks Inc. on the grounds that the companies couldn't be sued. The justices said there was enough evidence of unlawful intent for the case to go to trial.

File-sharing services shouldn't get a free pass on bad behavior, justices said.

"We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by the clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties," Justice David H. Souter wrote for the court.

At issue was whether the file-sharing services should be held liable even if they have no direct control over what millions of online users are doing with the software they provide for free. As much as 90 percent of songs and movies copied on the file-sharing networks are downloaded illegally, according to music industry filings.

The entertainment industry said it needed protection against the billions of dollars in revenue they lose to illegal swapping. Consumer groups worried that expanded liability will stifle the technology revolution of the last two decades that brought video cassette recorders, MP3 players and Apple's iPod.

Companies will have to pay music and movie artists for up to billions in losses if they are found to have promoted illegal downloading.

Two lower courts previously sided with Grokster without holding a trial. They each based their decisions on the 1984 Supreme Court ruling that Sony Corp. could not be sued over consumers who used its VCRs to make illegal copies of movies.

The lower courts reasoned that, like VCRs, the file-sharing software can be used for "substantial" legal purposes, such as giving away free songs, free software or government documents. They also said the file-sharing services were not legally responsible because they don't have central servers pointing users to copyright material.

But in Monday's ruling, Souter said lower courts could find the file-sharing services responsible by examining factors such as how companies marketed the product or whether they took easily available steps to reduce infringing uses.

"There is substantial evidence in MGM's favor on all elements of inducement," Souter wrote.

Associated Press

Guns!

This is what I dont understand. How can filesharing services be responsible for what their users do? It can be for good or bad. Same for guns. Someone can take a gun and perform criminal acts but the person who did the act is responsible not the company that made the gun!

So far this week the Supreme court is batting zero. First they say private companies can take over your property and home for development and now this.

re: Guns!

Yep, this country has gone to hell in a handbasket I tell ya. It's not by the people for the people anymore - it's by big business for big business these days. We are just the consumers - who are actually being consumed. Sucked and bled dry... I hate to think how few rights Americans will still have in 50 years. Thank gawd I'll be dead by then.

----
You talk the talk, but do you waddle the waddle?

re: Guns! (more)

There's a very interesting thread going on kuroshin about that property thing you brought up. It kinda solidifies what I was basically trying to say. Very interesting - and scary!

Here it is.

----
You talk the talk, but do you waddle the waddle?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

More in Tux Machines

IPA Font license added to license list

We recently updated our list of various licenses and comments about them to include the IPA Font license. It is a copyleft free software license for fonts, incompatible with the GPL. Read more

OpenForum Europe Challenges Governments to Walk the Open Format Walk

OpenForum Europe, an advocacy group focusing on IT openness in government, issued a press release earlier today announcing its launch of a new public Internet portal. At that site, anyone can report a government page that offers a document intended for collaborative use for downloading if that document is not available in an OpenDocument Format (ODF) compliant version. The portal is called FixMyDocuments.eu, and you can show your support for the initiative (as I have) by adding your name here (the first supporter listed is the EU's indominatable digital champion, Neelie Kroes). The announcement coincides with the beginning of another initiative, Global Legislative Openness Week, which will involve global activities annd "events hosted by the Legislative Openness Working Group of the Open Government Partnership and members of the parliamentary openness community." A full calendar of events is here. Read more

Nouveau For Linux 3.18 Gains DP Audio, More Re-Clocking

Ben Skeggs sent in his Nouveau DRM driver changes for the drm-next tree of open-source NVIDIA driver improvements that will land in Linux 3.18. With the DRM merge window now closing earlier in the cycle, David Airlie is cutting off new features for the next kernel merge window from landing into drm-next after -rc5 of the current kernel. Thus, this week is the cut-off for new DRM driver functionality aiming for Linux 3.18 with Linux 3.17-rc5 having been released. As such, Ben Skeggs sent in his big batch of Nouveau DRM improvements. Read more

With Android One, Google puts itself firmly back in the OS' driving seat

Under Android One, Google has developed its reference hardware designs — meaning OEMs no longer have to develop and test their own smartphones; they just pick up Google's ready-to-wear versions and get manufacturing. Google already has three local Indian smartphone makers signed up to do just that — Karbonn, Spice, and Micromax — all soon be be selling Google-designed, Android One-powered devices for around $100. Android One uses a stock version of Android, as seen on its Nexus products — meaning no UI customisation is possible — but Google has graciously offered to let OEMs and mobile operators add their own apps to handsets running the OS. The operators don't seem to mind the disintermediation much, and have teamed up with Google to launch Android One mobile plans to coincide with the launch of the new phones. Read more