Grokster, the Supreme Court, and us
Published: 28 Jun 2005 17:20 BST
That said, today's court decision may ultimately make it more difficult to get some file-swapping software.
Why is this so important to me? I don't download movies or music online.
Grokster wasn't just about file swapping, and this ruling was viewed by some as one of the most critical technological decisions in the last 20 years. That's because it threatened to undo a Supreme Court balance struck in 1984, which allowed the Sony Betamax videocassette recorder to be sold without liability, even though it could be used to make copies of copyrighted works.
That case was grounded by the idea of "substantial noninfringing use", which essentially said that any technological product that could be used for legal purposes could be sold, even if it could also be used to infringe copyright. That's protected a huge range of digital products, from the CD burner to the iPod to the personal computer itself.
Intel and other companies argued that new companies and products could be severely undermined if the Betamax decision was changed substantially.
So is the Betamax approach a thing of the past?
Not at all. The court said that the "substantial noninfringing use" standard was still in place — but that a company could lose its protection if it actively encourages copyright infringement.
Can Congress do anything to change the result?
In theory, yes. The Supreme Court based its opinion on a reading of previous law and existing copyright statutes. Congress could change the laws if it wanted to have a substantially different outcome. Technology lobbyists say they are still digesting the ruling and is likely to wait to see how lower courts interpret this decision before seeking any new legislation.
Do you have questions that haven't been answered? Use Talk Back below, and we'll try to add the ones we can answer to this list.
Previous
Did you find this article useful?
193 out of 372 people found this useful
Digg
Slashdot
Del.ici.ous
Stumble
Reddit
