Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Internet Software Piracy Is Not Fair Use
In a decision interpreting the criminal offenses provision of the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. '506), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has held that a criminal conspiracy to pirate software did not constitute “fair use” simply because the Web site to access the software was operated by a university professor. U.S. v. Slater, 348 F.3d 666 (7th Cir. 2003). The Seventh Circuit found “preposterous” the defendant's argument that Internet piracy could become authorized under the fair use doctrine by using a professor as a Web site operator.
The case arose from the indictment for conspiracy to commit copyright infringement of Jason Slater and Christian Morley, members of an organization called “Pirates With Attitudes” (“PWA”), a group dedicated to unauthorized Internet dissemination of copyrighted software. The FBI disbanded PWA and in 2000, Slater, Morley and 15 other PWA members were indicted under 17 U.S.C. '506(a)(2), 18 U.S.C. '371 and 18 U.S.C. '2319(c)(1). Slater pled guilty, but Morley stood trial and was convicted by a jury. On appeal, the sole issues were: 1) whether the jury should have been instructed on the fair use doctrine and 2) whether the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois properly evaluated the monetary value of the loss for the purpose of applying the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines (“U.S.S.G.”).
Organized in the 1990s, PWA existed to make large amounts of copyrighted software freely available over the Internet. Although PWA members did not pay money for access to the software, they contributed either their special access to the software (“suppliers”), their ability to delete internal copyright protection from the software code (“crackers”), their ability to test and add descriptive information to the software (“packagers”) or their skills in uploading the pirated software to special PWA Internet sites (“couriers”). The indictment focused on PWA's “Sentinel” site. The Sentinel site was operated by a university professor who hid the computer hardware in a closet on campus, operating it without the university's knowledge or authorization.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?