Supreme Court Sets Another Scary Precedent

Posted by Pile (5748 views) Add this story to MyYahoo Add this article to del.icio.us Submit article to Reddit Add story to Furl Add story to StumbleUpon [E-Mail link]


In the case of Grokster vs MGM, the court basically ruled that there was indeed a case for Grokster being liable for the copyright infringement perpetrated by the software's users.

With a precedent like this, almost any manufacturer of any object that could be used illegally might be held liable for the negligence of one of its users.

Think about it like this: Apparently the case centered around the degree to which these software products may have been designed to perpetrate illegal activity. Along those lines, wouldn't there be evidence to indicate that more guns are used illegally than legally and therefore all gun manufacturers should be held liable for the crimes committed by those using their products?

The United States Supreme Court, in a unanimous ruling, disagreed with two lower court rulings. Todayıs opinion agrees with the MPAA and RIAA contention that P2P developers are responsible for the infringing activities of its users. The decision is a serious setback for commercial file-sharing companies, who were hoping a favorable Supreme Court decision would give the necessary leverage to negotiate a distribution agreement with the RIAA and MPAA.

Details

 

 

Comments

 
Name: (change name for anonymous posting)
Title:
Comments:
   

1 Article displayed.

Pursuant to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC § 230), BSAlert is a user-contributed editorial web site and does not endorse any specific content, but merely acts as a "sounding board" for the online community. Any and all quoted material is referenced pursuant to "Fair Use" (17 U.S.C. § 107). Like any information resource, use your own judgement and seek out the facts and research and make informed choices.

Powered by Percleus (c) 2005-2047 - Content Management System

[Percleus 0.9.5] (c) 2005, PCS