You know a technology is a big deal when the Supreme Court writes about it. The first two pages of the MGM v Grokster decision read like “What is Peer-to-Peer?” as written by Justice Souter:
(continued…) (654 words)Archive for June 27th, 2005
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously against Grokster, finding the company’s actions to be illegal. (Reported by SCOTUSblog.) We’ll know the Court’s reasoning once the opinion is released; I’ll post a link here as soon as it is available.
“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.
what The Supremes said is that “One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright … is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties using the device, regardless of the device’s lawful uses.” The promotion is the key part of that statement.
[Full text of opinions will eventually show up at the SCOTUS 2004 term opinions page. Here’s an Atom feed of updates to that page.]
