Grokster Loses
Grokster lost, unanimously. The case was remanded for trial. Opinion by Souter. The best reports so far are is here and here.
Souter’s opinion is here; Ginsburg’s concurrence is here; Breyer’s concurrence is here.
Choice quotes from the opinion:
One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright … is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties using the device, regardless of the device’s lawful uses.
“Each company showed itself to be aiming to satisfy a known source of demand for copyright infringement,” Justice David H. Souter wrote for the court. Souter said “substantial evidence” supported the industry’s case.
2 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Linkblog Atom Feed
Grokster, Brand X
I have not yet completed reading through today’s two Supreme Court opinions (over 100 pages, and I’m a fairly slow reader…) but what I have read so far is disappointing. While there’s no way to accurately predict how great the…
Trackback by Blogs at CIS - Colette Vogele — June 27, 2005 @ 5:30 pm
The 5-8 Year Problem: Asking the Ocean To Turn Back Won’t Work With Digital Media Tides
In 5-8 years, I think the Grokster problem will be solved by a combination of 1. business model changes by legacy media; 2. changes in demographics because the fact is there will be a critical mass of users who have…
Trackback by Napsterization — June 30, 2005 @ 8:57 am