Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US Court Rejects Movie, Music Makers' Piracy Claims
yahoo news ^ | Thu, Aug 19, 2004 | Ben Berkowitz

Posted on 08/19/2004 1:59:49 PM PDT by expat_panama

Yahoo! News News Home - Help

ReutersUS Court Rejects Movie, Music Makers' Piracy Claims

Thu, Aug 19, 2004

By Ben Berkowitz

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Thursday delivered a stinging blow to the anti-piracy efforts of major movie studios and music companies, ruling that several online file-sharing software companies are not liable for copyright infringement.

The three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found in favor of Grokster Ltd., among others, and held the relief from piracy sought by the movie and music studios would amount to a renovation of the existing copyright standards, which the court called "unwise."

In a nod to the rapid changes in the online media industry over the last few years, the judges further said history has proven that with new technology, markets have a way of correcting themselves.

"Thus, it is prudent for courts to exercise caution before restructuring liability theories for the purpose of addressing specific market abuses, despite their apparent present magnitude," the judges wrote in their opinion.

At stake in the dispute are future revenues in the expanding market for digital downloads of movies and music, a business the record labels have now embraced and the movie studios have begun to explore in earnest.

The music industry has suffered through a sales slump in recent years and blames much of that on illegal file sharing, although file sharers blame bad music.

The movie industry, through the Motion Picture Association of America, claims analog piracy -- such as illegal copying of videotapes -- costs it some $3.5 billion a year and is concerned that digital piracy will do far more harm.

FILE SWAPPERS ELATED

The MPAA, which represents the movie studios, was not immediately available to comment, nor was the Recording Industry Association of America (news - web sites), which represents the record labels.

The Distributed Computing Industry Association, which represents a broad range of file-sharing companies, including Grokster, greeted the court's ruling with elation.

"It is time for litigation and legislative upheaval to be supplanted by commerce," the association said in a statement.

At issue was whether the defendants were liable for knowing of and contributing to copyright infringement, whether they gained and if they had the authority over infringing parties.

The court found the defendants did not materially contribute to copyright infringement and that "the sort of monitoring and supervisory relationship that has supported vicarious liability in the past is completely absent" here.

In arguments to the court in February, the studios and record companies said Grokster and others should apply software filters to block online swaps copyrighted work, but the services said doing so would effectively shut them down.

After the music industry was rocked by the now-legendary file-sharing service Napster (news - web sites) (which has since been reborn as a legitimate platform), the entertainment community began looking more actively for ways to securely sell their wares online.

Perhaps the most successful such effort has been the iTunes Music Store from Apple Computer Inc. (Nasdaq:AAPL - news), which has sold more than 100 million music downloads to date.

Given their large file sizes, movie downloads have not been as popular to date, but that is expected to change as high-speed broadband connections become more widely used. (Additional reporting by Bob Tourtellotte)



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 9thcircuit; mpaa; musicpiracy; riaa
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last
A blow to tort trial lawyers from their own court system.  !
1 posted on 08/19/2004 1:59:50 PM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: expat_panama
"Thus, it is prudent for courts to exercise caution before restructuring liability theories for the purpose of addressing specific market abuses, despite their apparent present magnitude," the judges wrote in their opinion.

I.e. we're gonna let the legislatures legislate about this. Stunning idea.

2 posted on 08/19/2004 2:02:08 PM PDT by drlevy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama

Maybe the RIAA can try to make money by, hmmm... I don't know, maybe by MAKING DECENT MUSIC for a change?!


3 posted on 08/19/2004 2:04:58 PM PDT by inkling
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drlevy88
In a nod to the rapid changes in the online media industry over the last few years, the judges further said history has proven that with new technology, markets have a way of correcting themselves.

Wow. Finally a reasonable ruling out of these clowns. I am shocked.

4 posted on 08/19/2004 2:06:39 PM PDT by Smogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama
Outstanding news. Thanks for posting this!

I personally have not bought one CD since the RIAA went on its turbo-fascist rampage and killed Napster. The MPAA gets equally little sympathy.

5 posted on 08/19/2004 2:07:07 PM PDT by Prime Choice (Democrats. They want to have their cake and eat yours too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; Ed_NYC; MonroeDNA; widgysoft; Springman; Timesink; dubyaismypresident; Grani; coug97; ...
 

Just damn.

If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...

6 posted on 08/19/2004 2:07:32 PM PDT by mhking (Why is every city in Iraq a "Holy City?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama
The music industry has suffered through a sales slump in recent years and blames much of that on illegal file sharing, although file sharers blame bad music.

If the music is so bad, then why do file sharers steal so much of it?

7 posted on 08/19/2004 2:09:00 PM PDT by asgardshill (The Republican's best weapon lies midway between John Kerry's nose and lower chin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama

guess Metallica will have to go back to working at the
car wash.


8 posted on 08/19/2004 2:09:23 PM PDT by Rakkasan1 (it takes a school to bankrupt a village)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: asgardshill
If the music is so bad, then why do file sharers steal so much of it?

That's a good question and the answer is that the music industry sells overpriced albums filled mostly with filler while the file sharers "steal" (your characterization) "A" sides of (nonexistent) singles. "85% of everything is crap", once said Theodore Sturgeon.

9 posted on 08/19/2004 2:14:29 PM PDT by Revolting cat! ("In the end, nothing explains anything!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama
On a related matter, has the MPAA said anything against the Cuban broadcast of Fahrenheit 9/11 which was "allegedly" a bootleg?

The only thing I have seen was an article stating that the Academy won't bar the film from competition because the broadcast was "not" authorized. I have my doubts; the director reportedly was okay with people downloading this film and getting it out to the masses.

10 posted on 08/19/2004 2:23:28 PM PDT by weegee (YOU could have been aborted, and you wouldn't have had a CHOICE about it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prime Choice; drlevy88; inkling; Rakkasan1
We still hear about this or that senator sucking up to the entertainment goons with new worthless legislation but the technology changes faster than shysters can make up bad laws.   And that's fast.

If ISP's were liable for file sharing, then they'd have to be also liable for html and email enclosures.  Truly bonkers.

11 posted on 08/19/2004 2:24:37 PM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

Feel free to substitute whichever term you want for the word "steal". But I've always considered it to be an accurate description of what occurs when somebody acquires a product or service for their own use without paying an agreed-upon price to the producer and/or rights-holder for it.


12 posted on 08/19/2004 2:30:32 PM PDT by asgardshill (The Republican's best weapon lies midway between John Kerry's nose and lower chin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama
We still hear about this or that senator sucking up to the entertainment goons with new worthless legislation but the technology changes faster than shysters can make up bad laws.   And that's fast.

IOW, technology changes faster than new laws can be Hatched.

13 posted on 08/19/2004 2:34:38 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama

I used Kazaa lite to download farenheit 911. No way I'm paying moore.

The movie was not funny, btw. At least not if you've matured beyond middleschool.


14 posted on 08/19/2004 2:51:35 PM PDT by RobRoy (You only "know" what you experience. Everything else is mere belief.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: asgardshill

>>If the music is so bad, then why do file sharers steal so much of it?<<

Because they can. I sample maybe 10% of what I download, and keep only a fraction of that. Plus, being an old guy, most of what I keep has been out of print for some time. When I DID buy stuff, it was from the used record stores. The only reason I download any more is to learn songs for my cover band, which already pays fees to play the covers.

Most people download just for the thrill of it and then tire of it eventually.


15 posted on 08/19/2004 2:54:32 PM PDT by RobRoy (You only "know" what you experience. Everything else is mere belief.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: asgardshill

Who said they're necessarily stealing. People who have paid for content on CD or cassette will logon to a service and download digital copies of stuff they already have and burn them to cds, etc. The industry wants to be able to resell to people in most cases, something they've already paid for once. Screw 'em.


16 posted on 08/19/2004 2:58:25 PM PDT by Havoc (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
>>If the music is so bad, then why do file sharers steal so much of it?<<

Because they can.

Bingo. I myself have always been a member of that "just because I CAN do something doesn't necessarily mean that I WILL do it" camp. Since I find it hard to shave without looking at myself in a mirror to get the nooks and crannies, I guess I'll just keep writing checks when it comes to filling up my hard drive with music.

17 posted on 08/19/2004 2:59:06 PM PDT by asgardshill (The Republican's best weapon lies midway between John Kerry's nose and lower chin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: asgardshill

Did you know that the only individuals the RIAA has pursued legally are those that allow uploading from their hard drive?


18 posted on 08/19/2004 3:03:18 PM PDT by RobRoy (You only "know" what you experience. Everything else is mere belief.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: asgardshill

If I ever download a piece of music that I would have bought, I will send a check. For example, I have downloaded several videos from Pink Floyd's Pulse. I have alse checked the video store every month for two years for dvd availability. I also used to own it on laserdisc before it got thrown in the trash over a divorce.

I feel no guilt downloading any of those videos or the mp3's. None whatsoever.


19 posted on 08/19/2004 3:05:28 PM PDT by RobRoy (You only "know" what you experience. Everything else is mere belief.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Havoc
Who said they're necessarily stealing.

I did. But that's just me.

People who have paid for content on CD or cassette will logon to a service and download digital copies of stuff they already have and burn them to cds, etc.

Why would anyone download content they already have on a CD? Were I so inclined to do so, my plain-vanilla computer could easily rip any track on a CD and put said track onto my hard drive for my private use. My CD player holds (and has) 300 disks, and that's pretty much what I use as far as music at home.

And as for tracks on cassette, do you also feel that Ford should be legally obligated to give you a brand-new 2005 pickup for free if the engine blows up in your primer-colored 1971 F-100?

The industry wants to be able to resell to people in most cases, something they've already paid for once.

Which, in my opinion, is something that they're entitled to do since they're the copyright holder. Those who don't agree or can't meet the copyright holder's terms for use of their product shouldn't be consuming the copyright holder's product.

Screw 'em.

No thanks.

20 posted on 08/19/2004 3:11:39 PM PDT by asgardshill (The Republican's best weapon lies midway between John Kerry's nose and lower chin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson