Say Goodbye...Again

The iPod. iTunes. P2P. Napster. Grokster. Morpheus. Kazza. Gnutella. Twenty years ago, these were part of the imagination of crazy, Star Trek-minded geek people. Ten years ago, these were the so-called gleam in a collective "someone's" eye. In 2005, these are household descriptors of wildly popular entertainment sources.

Back in 1999, a college kid developed Napster to share music files. The RIAA took it down. Then, other rebels sprouted up, and with an even more sinister plan, these new P2P giants removed themselves from the middle...we deliver the software, but it's the consumer that shares files, not us. A smart move to avoid liability, or so it was guessed.

On June 27, 2005, the United States Supreme Court ruled that "one that distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, going beyond mere distribution with knowledge of third party action, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties using the device, regardless of the device's lawful uses." MGM, et al. v. Grokster, et al. In other words, Grokster, you are liable for copyright infringement if any one of the users of your software is liable.

What can you say to that, other than wow! This is a HUGE win for copyright owners; a HUGE loss for technology developers. Only time will tell how this plays out in a practical sense.

Now Sony fought a very similar battle back in 1984 - a battle to save technology development at the (potential) expense of the destruction copyrights, i.e., the Betamax case. There, Sony won and the court ruled that the Betamax recorder had substantial non-infringing uses such that copyright owners could not prohibit the manufacture, sale and distribution of those devices. The facts, to be sure, were much different than in the Grokster case. Going back even further, when the photocopier was developed, similar litigation ensued. The truth is, each time a major technological development for copying and/or sharing is created, a major lawsuit is born. Copyright is limiting - "you can't do that." Technology is expansive - "see what you can do."

So, regardless of which way you lean on the fence, it's an interesting case and a major development in copyright law, certain to affect all industries, and certainly the film and music industries.

For more reading on the copyright owner's take, check out the MPAA, Respect Copyrights, and RIAA websites. For reading on the otherside of the coin, check out the EFF website, and Lawrence Lessig's blog.

~ Brock