Create an Account
username: password:
 
  MemeStreams Logo

MemeStreams Discussion

search


This page contains all of the posts and discussion on MemeStreams referencing the following web page: CNN.com - Court: File-sharing services can be liable for music theft - Jun 27, 2005. You can find discussions on MemeStreams as you surf the web, even if you aren't a MemeStreams member, using the Threads Bookmarklet.

CNN.com - Court: File-sharing services can be liable for music theft - Jun 27, 2005
by k at 11:42 am EDT, Jun 27, 2005

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 tria

Fuck!

[ That is EXACTLY the reaction Ryan had. I agreed then and will now do so again. -k]


 
RE: CNN.com - Court: File-sharing services can be liable for music theft - Jun 27, 2005
by Decius at 12:00 pm EDT, Jun 27, 2005

k wrote:
Fuck!

[ That is EXACTLY the reaction Ryan had. I agreed then and will now do so again. -k]

I might suggest waiting for the EFF to announce their take on things. I haven't read the decision yet and the devil is in the details, but I don't think the EFF was expecting "total victory." Their pre-decision reading guide nearly predicts a result of this sort:

# No matter what, we've won. From the beginning of this lawsuit, the entertainment industries pushed the lower courts to adopt extreme, outlandish interpretations of copyright law. For example, they argued that the Sony Betamax decision doesn't apply at all to Internet technologies, and that simply knowing that somebody is using your technology to infringe triggers an obligation to redesign it. No matter what the Court may announce on Monday, it will not be adopting this extreme position. So remember what we've already won.

# Next Bout: Congress... A big victory for either side will be characterized as an "extreme" result, potentially strengthening the hand of the opposite side in Congress. An intermediate outcome, on the other hand, may lead Congress to "leave well enough alone."

They may have gotten what they wanted already.


  
RE: CNN.com - Court: File-sharing services can be liable for music theft - Jun 27, 2005
by dmv at 12:58 pm EDT, Jun 27, 2005

Decius wrote:
I might suggest waiting for the EFF to announce their take on things. I haven't read the decision yet and the devil is in the details...
They may have gotten what they wanted already.

I agree. From the sources I have been reading, this seems like a reasonably well structured result. Having the three concurring opinions, it sounds like the decision is structured on the intent. And intent is a giant loophole. It means that unless you have very good counsel, don't write memos, email, or ad copy around what bad things could be done with your technology. Verbally insist on only doing good with technology, and you won't have to retain great lawyers before a small release.

That is, if we wanted a stronger ruling, Grokster and Kazaa were really bad poster companies.

And I agree with the EFF that we're probably better off with a result like this than a strong opinion in either direction (considering the resources stacked against us if it had gone very badly or very well).


CNN.com - Court: File-sharing services can be liable for music theft - Jun 27, 2005
by Acidus at 11:40 am EDT, Jun 27, 2005

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 tria

Fuck!


 
 
Powered By Industrial Memetics