Key US file-sharing ruling looms

[NikkiD]

Sooooo let me get this straight.... the company that makes the p2p software is legally responsible for the way people use their software....

Let's take that one step further now, shall we?

The company that makes the hardware is legally responsible for the way people use their hardware.

Let the games begin.

The doctor that gives birth to a child is responsible for what they do.


edit: not that the doctor gives birth, i mean help the mother give birth, i don't know the proper term for it.

Delivers.

[Darth Sushi]

I wonder if the gun lobby is worried?

[sArA]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4627679.stm

File-sharing suffers major defeat

BBC News Online, Monday, 27 June, 2005

The US Supreme Court has ruled that file-sharing companies are to blame for
what users do with their software.

The surprise ruling could start a legal assault on the creators of
file-sharing networks such as Grokster and Morpheus.

The case was brought by 28 movie and music makers who claimed that rampant
piracy was denting profits.

The Supreme Court judges were expected to rule in favour of the file-sharers
because of legal precedents set when video recorders first appeared.


Big win

The unanimous ruling is a victory for recording companies and film studios in
what is widely seen as one of the most important copyright cases in years.

Andrew Lack, chief executive of Sony BMG, said his company would pursue those
who failed to comply with the law.

"The court made it very clear that we can go after damages and that we can
chase them out," Mr Lack told BBC World's World Business Report.

"We will do that if necessary, but my hope is that we will find new bridges to
legitimise a lot of services that formerly were confused about what was right
and wrong, legal and illegal."

The legal case against Streamcast Networks - which makes the software behind
Grokster and Morpheus - began in October 2001 when 28 media companies filed
their legal complaint.

The complaint alleged that Streamcast was prospering on the back of the
unfettered piracy taking place on the file-sharing networks.

However, the attempts to win damages suffered a series of defeats as
successive courts sided with the file-sharing networks. The judges in those
lower courts cited a ruling made in 1984 over Sony's Betamax video recorder.

In that case, the Supreme Court said that the majority of people using a video
recorder for legal uses outweighed any illegal use of the technology.

But in this latest ruling the judges set aside the lower court decisions. It
means the makers of a technology have to answer for what people do with it if
they use it to break the law.

In the ruling Justice David Souter wrote: "The question is under what
circumstances the distributor of a product capable of both lawful and
unlawful use is liable for acts of copyright infringement by third parties
using the product."

He added: "We hold 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."

Reaction to the ruling was swift.

Dan Glickman, president of the Motion Picture Association of America, said:
"Today's unanimous ruling is an historic victory for intellectual property in
the digital age, and is good news for consumers, artists, innovation and
lawful Internet businesses."

John Kennedy, head of the International Federation of the Phonographic
Industry said: "It quite simply destroys the argument that peer-to-peer
services bear no responsibility for illegal activities that take place on
their networks."

In other decisions on Monday, the Supreme Court:

* ruled against the display of the Ten Commandments inside two Kentucky
courtrooms but approved a monument to the same in Texas

* declined to hear appeals by two US journalists facing a contempt ruling
by a lower court over their investigation into an alleged White House
intelligence leak

* overturned a ruling that cable operators' high-speed internet lines must
be opened up to rivals.

The rulings came on the last day of the US Supreme Court's current judicial
session. It now breaks for a three-month recess.

One expected announcement that did not appear concerned the retirement of
80-year-old Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

Justice Rehnquist is suffering from thyroid cancer, breathes through a
tracheal tube and struggled to talk during a speech closing the current court
term that thanked court workers.


Unseen effects

In its ruling the Supreme Court said there was "substantial evidence" that
Streamcast Networks had "induced" people to use its software to illegally
share copyrighted files.

It is unclear yet what action this ruling will prompt from movie studios and
music makers who brought the original case. It could mean claims for
substantial damages from Streamcast or moves to get the file-sharing networks
shut down.

Wayne Rosso, former Grokster president and now head of legal file-sharing
system Mashboxx, said: "If I'm running the RIAA [Recording Industry
Association of America], you're going to see lawsuits coming down like a
Texas hailstorm. Don't be surprised to see an unusually large number filed
immediately."

He said it would mean that users would have to get used to paying for music.

Michael McGuire, from analyst firm GartnerG2, said: "It's something of a
surprise. It will be interesting to see how record labels respond. It could
be argued that these peer-to-peer services were the most efficient way to
deliver rich media."

The decision could also have an impact on any technology firm developing
gadgets or devices that let people enjoy media on the move.

If strictly interpreted the ruling means that these hi-tech firms will have to
try to predict the ways people can use these devices to pirate copyrighted
media and install controls to stop this infringement.

The ruling could also prompt a re-drafting of copyright laws by the US
Congress.

[Filliz]

So why not hold car manufacturers responsible for all the accidents that happen because of speeding?

They're making/and promoting their cars that can go from 0 to xxxMPH in x.sec.

[tesco]

The doctor that gives birth to a child is responsible for what they do.


edit: not that the doctor gives birth, i mean help the mother give birth, i don't know the proper term for it.

Delivers.

That's it, thanks.

[tracydani]

I wonder if this gives them a way into newsgroups...

The interfaces are software and I can't imagine they are primarily used for legit purposes.

This could give them the leverage needed to get customer info in the future handing them everything they need.

Sure, currently they may not keep records, but they may be forced to just to keep themselves out of trouble.

TD

[RealitY]

The fact is Usenet has far more legit uses than not...