Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<b>Commentary:</b> 'Unanimous' Vote In Grokster Has Split Views
The future direction of digital technologies was on the line when the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in March over peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing software. And few were predicting that the justices would easily reach their decision. Given the difficult copyright law and policy issues in the case, it seemed highly unlikely that the justices could all agree. But 3 months after oral arguments, the court surprised many observers by issuing a unanimous decision ' at least as to the main holding. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd., 125 S. Ct. 2764 (2005).
In its opinion, the Supreme Court clearly focused the test for copyright infringement liability on the subjective question of the purpose of the software's distribution ' an approach that better comports with basic notions of fairness than that of the courts below. But read together, the plurality opinion and two concurring opinions raise a new set of disquieting questions.
The plaintiffs ' motion-picture studios, recording companies, songwriters and music publishers ' who sued Grokster and StreamCast Networks Inc., in California federal court, alleged that the defendants were liable for two types of secondary copyright infringement: Contributory infringement, where a defendant induces or materially contributes to direct infringement with knowledge of that direct infringement; and vicarious infringement, where a defendant profits from direct infringement and has the right and ability to supervise the direct infringer.
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.
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.
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?