Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Australian Court Finds For Music Company

By Matt Schruers and Jonathan Band
October 03, 2005

On the heels of the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in MGM Studios v. Grokster, 125 S. Ct. 2764 (2005), where the Court found that file-sharing services could be held liable for contributory copyright infringement, the Federal Court of Australia on Sept. 5 decided Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd. v. Sharman License Holdings Ltd., [2005] FCA 1242.

Justice Murray Rutledge Wilcox of the Federal Court held that certain defendants associated with Sharman Networks were liable for “authorization” of copyright infringement as a result of having distributed the Kazaa file-sharing software.

Read These Next
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It Image

Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

A Lawyer's System for Active Reading Image

Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.

Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls Image

With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.