Woot. The good guys win in court!

[Huzurdaddi]

I thought that the RIAA was going to have to go the legislature to get this done:

http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2005/06/27/grokster-file-sharing-copyright-cx_ah_0627grokster.html

[Midnight Son]

Wait, RIAA are the good guys?

[Menzo]

It's really a limited victory. The ruling has to do with services that are specifically marketed for infringing copyrights. For example, I don't think BitTorrent would qualify.

Any broader a ruling would see lawsuits against DVD-R manufacturers, dual-deck VCRs, and even ISPs.

[GenericID]

"... with the object of promoting ...." The wording is precise, so it seems it's not really a clear-cut open and shut case. I'm sure both camps are claiming this works in their favour, sort of.

[Huzurdaddi]

It's really a limited victory. The ruling has to do with services that are specifically marketed for infringing copyrights. For example, I don't think BitTorrent would qualify.

Any broader a ruling would see lawsuits against DVD-R manufacturers, dual-deck VCRs, and even ISPs.

I agree. However it does shut down the idea of a business model explicitly based on copyright infringement. Well at least in the US.

[Quaro]

Precise? Are you kidding? It's not clear at all what this ruling prohibits and doesn't prohibit. Why isn't a VCR a device whose business model is built on copyright infringement? From what I can tell it seems to depend solely on the 'intent' of the company who makes the VCR. What does "promoting infringement" mean? It seems to imply that Grokster is prohibit because it failed to takes steps to prohibit infringement. There's nothing about Bittorrent that makes it hard to infringe so I don't see why this wouldn't apply to bittorrent software in general.

[GenericID]

Precise? Are you kidding? It's not clear at all what this ruling prohibits and doesn't prohibit. Why isn't a VCR a device whose business model is built on copyright infringement? From what I can tell it seems to depend solely on the 'intent' of the company who makes the VCR. What does "promoting infringement" mean? It seems to imply that Grokster is prohibit because it failed to takes steps to prohibit infringement. There's nothing about Bittorrent that makes it hard to infringe so I don't see why this wouldn't apply to bittorrent software in general.

Oh, it does precisely what each party wants: the media companies can split hairs on what is considered inappropriate promoting of copyright infringement, the P2P software writers can point the fingers at the users and SCOTUS can once more twiddle their thumbs, ensuring countless lawyer-hours are spent on this never-ending affair. :D

[GenericID]

<double post>

[Troy S Goodfellow]

Precise? Are you kidding? It's not clear at all what this ruling prohibits and doesn't prohibit. Why isn't a VCR a device whose business model is built on copyright infringement? From what I can tell it seems to depend solely on the 'intent' of the company who makes the VCR. What does "promoting infringement" mean? It seems to imply that Grokster is prohibit because it failed to takes steps to prohibit infringement. There's nothing about Bittorrent that makes it hard to infringe so I don't see why this wouldn't apply to bittorrent software in general.

"Promoting infringement" is more than that. The Court ruled that there was lots of evidence that Grokster had built its entire business plan around infringement. It targeted Napster users just as it came under attack for copyright violations, promoted articles that referred to Grokster as a haven for pirates, and, more importantly, could prove no significant lawful use.

A lot of the decision is spent discussing Sony and whether or not the Appeals Court was applying it properly. The two concurring opinions split hairs on what exactly the decision means for the Sony precedent.

But the majority ruled that simply having a theoretical lawful use is not what Sony was all about, which seems to be what the Appeal Court had ruled. For SCOTUS, this was more about the business model of Grokster, I think, than the technology of P2P.

Troy