Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Hooray for the courts!
#1

Just when I thought the US Justice System was fundamentally flawed...:


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.

http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/2...er_decision.pdf

In a nutshell:

The difference between Napster and Grokster, as explained in the Judge's opinion, is that Napster had a centralised index and were therefore in a "supervisory" role with the ability to prevent copyright infringement on a per-file basis. There is no centralised index for Grokster and the authors of the software do not therefore have a supervisory role. The software developers are unable to prevent individual acts of copyright infringement and therefore they do not have a duty to do so.

WOOT!
Reply
#2

does that mean win mx is home free too>
Reply
#3

Its about time someone saw sense in this .
Reply
#4

How about Limewire and Ares?
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread / Author Replies Views Last Post
Last Post by rabid
08-06-2004, 10:10 AM
Last Post by TyrionXavier
07-21-2004, 11:27 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)