![]() The justices’ questions hinted that the court may formulate a legal doctrine that provides flexible standards to protect new businesses. If so, the company would be liable for secondary infringement. ![]() He responded that the first question to ask is whether the business is built on infringement and whether the vast majority of use for the technology is infringing. The justices asked Donald Verrilli, representing the entertainment industry parties, what the new standard of secondary liability should be. Richard Taranto, representing Grokster and StreamCast, urged the court to leave matters as they stand - affirming the decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that held the two companies not liable for infringement because they did not have specific knowledge of their users’ infringements at a time when the companies could control their use.Īfter Taranto argued that the technology industry has relied on a rule set out 20 years ago by the Supreme Court in the so-called Sony-Betamax case, Justice Scalia responded, “We are not going to decide this case on the basis of stare decisis,” meaning that the court will not simply rely on past cases for its decision but will take a fresh look at the issue. Grokster, et al., explores whether companies that provide peer-to-peer file-sharing software should be secondarily liable for copyright infringements by their users. The justices took active roles during oral arguments today (March 29) in the case brought by motion-picture studios, record labels, music publishers and songwriters against Grokster, StreamCast and others involved in file-sharing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |