Posted on 08/19/2004 3:18:16 PM PDT by demlosers
Grokster, Morpheus not liable for user's actions, appeals court says.
A U.S. federal appeals court ruled in favor of peer-to-peer software makers this week, stating that the companies behind the Grokster and Morpheus services are not liable for copyright infringement due to the actions of their users.
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously backed a lower court ruling that Grokster, Streamcast Networks (maker of the Morpheus service), and Musiccity.com are not responsible for users who illegally copy or share content such as music and movies over their services.
"The peer-to-peer file-sharing technology at issue is not simply a tool engineered to get around" previous rulings against the Napster file-sharing service, wrote Judge Sidney R. Thomas in a ruling for the panel. "The technology has numerous other uses, significantly reducing the distribution costs of public domain and permissively shared art and speech, as well as reducing the centralized control of that distribution."
Latest Setback
The ruling is a further setback for the plaintiffs, including the Motion Picture Association of America, the National Music Publisher's Association of America, and the Recording Industry Association of America, which were appealing an April 2003 ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Stephen Wilson.
The MPAA and RIAA both say in separate statements that they are reviewing the next legal steps to take, and they are widely expected to appeal the ruling to either the full 9th Circuit Court or to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Groups supporting the P-to-P networks, such as Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Knowledge, hailed the decision.
"This is a victory for innovators of all stripes," says EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney Fred von Lohmann in a statement from the group, which had argued on behalf of Streamcast. "The court's ruling makes it clear that innovators need not beg permission from record labels and Hollywood before they deploy exciting new technologies."
I love my BearShare.
Read it here. This is a tightly reasoned decision that is very likely to stand:
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/20040819_mgm_v_grokster_decision.pdf
Try Phex. No spyware.
Is this the first case the 9th Circuit has ever gotten right?
I like BearShare also.
I have always gotten clean downloads, unlike Kazaa.
Phex? Is that for downloading music files?
I got off Kazaa after the initial scare and am leery of trying to download any more files.Not that I did that many to begin with,but...still...
I'd like to find something that's fairly safe. And,how can you be sure your'e not downloading something that may be infected with a virus,or may corrupt your drivers?
Dude, Ares rocks!! Super easy to use, very fast search returns, many search results to choose from, etc. By far the best "my friend, not me" has tried yet!
Highest rated P-to-P site on CNet.com's Downloads page..not that I use such software myself (again, it's my pal, not me).
Gesundheit.
DC++ is great, but you have to share to get access to most of the sharing hubs. But once you're in, it's fantastic.
So let's don't hear any crying then when end users get dragged into court.
now to repeal ALL the RIAA illegal laws including the communist inspired "Digital Millennium Copyright Act" (DMCA) that guarantees that the U.S. will no longer be able to do anything technologically.
Is this the first case the 9th Circuit has ever gotten right?
Nah - I think that those jokers have begun to think of what the term TAR & FEATHERS really meant, and how boiling tar would really feel before the feathers were applied.
Typical of the leftist cowards, they are retreating to regroup --- now is the time we vote out or impeach the entire lot of them.
Yep, RIAA fights p2p, MS got patent on anything including using of a screen or keyboard (sarcasm). You have strange laws in US...
We just got these laws recently thanks to an overabundance of useless LAWYERS!
The only person getting rich in computers today is a lawyer who all he does is sue businesses that use an "Automated Attendant" telephone equipment.
"Dial One for ...." etc.
The patent office - run by more lawyers - issued this P.O.S. lawyer a patent for "Dial one, dial two, etc" and of course, since all trials are judged by even more lawyers, the citizens get the royal screw.
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.