Forum - View topicNEWS: Grokster Held Liable for Copyright Violations on P2P Network
|
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TiredGamer
 Posts: 246 Location: Florida |
|
|||||
|
The decision itself can be found here.
The ruling simply expands liability for copyright infringement to include the promotion or encouragement of infringement. |
||||||
|
||||||
v1cious
 Posts: 6229 Location: Houston, TX |
|
|||||
|
how stupid. how the hell are they "encouraging" anything? it's not liike they're advertising it as a way to bootleg copyrighted material, that's just what users choose to do with it. i don't see how they can be held liable for personal usage.
|
||||||
|
||||||
Joe Mello
 Posts: 2310 Location: Online Terminal |
|
|||||
|
It helps if you read the story, lil v1cious
The $64 question is this: What does this mean for "us?" |
||||||
|
||||||
|
.Sy
Posts: 1266 |
|
|||||
But anyway, the fact is, this P2P network accounts for a significant part in popularity in anime shows, etc. I think I agreed with someone before, who said this whole thing is going to snowball into something big. |
||||||
|
||||||
AstroNerdBoy
 Posts: 413 Location: Denver, CO |
|
|||||
You mean like Sony's first commercials for the Betamax back in the day? Sony promised you could watch Columbo and Kojak (which were on at the same time) by watching one now and recording one to watch later. Yeah, see Big Entertainment said that recording anything from your TV to a VCR was copyright infringment and theft and Sony must be sued out of existance for creating such evil technology that allowed such horrid theft. Hmmm...now where have I heard these arguments before? How far the Supreme Court has fallen... |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Darkener
Posts: 33 |
|
|||||
Well... it isn't like we wouldn't see this coming... after the death of private property rights... this country I call a republic is no more... 
I guess in 20 or so years will be be living under socialist rule... 
|
||||||
|
||||||
crazydumbek
 Posts: 182 |
|
|||||
|
AstroNerdBoy:
Did you read any of the Supreme Court decision on Grokster? It cited (on page 3, no less) the Sony case as an example of a device (Betamax) which gives the user the potential to infringe copyright, but who's normal use ("taping to watch at a convenient time" as opposed to taping and redistributing shows) does not. Their argument against Grokster was that Grokster itself is not illegal, but they advertised and promoted the product as something to do illegal acts. It's kind of like a car company trying to make their car sound tough by advertising that "It's guaranteed to kill traffic cops at 20 mph". What surprised me was that the vote was unanimous. You would think that any of the more liberal judges would have dissenting votes based on issues of free speech. Oh well. Hopefully this won't be an issue.
That pretty much was the excuse of some of the opponents of the Patriot Act ... when explaining why they signed it. |
||||||
|
||||||
Ataru
 Posts: 2327 Location: Missouri (Strikeman) |
|
|||||
There is a difference. Recording for own use, like with DVRs and VCRs, is different when you record something and put it on BitTorrent. Putting on a P2P no longer makes it for own use. Backing up games, software, DVDs, and TV shows should be fine, but when people share copies of GTA 3, Windows XP, Spiderman 2, and Family Guy with everyone, I can see why the "Big Entertainment" would get upset. Now that Grokster has bite the big one, I'm sure it opens a door for Kazza, LimeWire, and BitTorrent. They have their ligit use, but there is most of it now is non-ligit. |
||||||
|
||||||
Edo
 Posts: 88 Location: Ontari-ari-ari-o! |
|
|||||
|
///
Last edited by Edo on Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:09 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||||
|
||||||
|
KDRudy
Posts: 11 |
|
|||||
|
BitTorrent will be fine, it's only purpose is to transfer large files more efficiently across the Internet. It has never been promoted by Bram Cohen as a tool for piracy that I have seen, which is the key here in the long run. The ruling itself is reasonable, lets just hope the lower court interpretations of it are as well when it comes up in the future.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Shale
Posts: 337 Location: The Middle of Nowhere, DE |
|
|||||
|
The Court did not explicitly find against Grokster. They established a new standard for P2P copyright violations, and then remanded the case for a new trial under that standard. I don't particularly like Grokster's chances in the trial, but it's not a done deal.
Also, while Bittorrent as a program is pretty much immune to legislation, this standard would make it very easy to shut down tracker sites and sites that link to torrents of copyrighted files, since that's a pretty damn explicit statement of purpose. Last edited by Shale on Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:10 pm; edited 3 times in total |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Joe Mello
Posts: 2310 Location: Online Terminal |
|
|||||
Oy. I meant ANN's 50-cent version. After all, THAT'S WHAT I QUOTED!! Anyway, to be honest, the line mark by the initial ruling on Sony had already been blurred. Tape trading has been around longer than P2P technology, and it's essentially the same thing. The only difference is that there is a forced exchange of 2 (or more) unique tapes. Of course, now with dual deck VCR's and DVD/VCR combos and whatnot, it can emulate P2P networks even more. So does this mean we open the old Sony case? I don't particularly think so. After all, a reverse ruling on that would cripple the same entertainment industry that wanted to condemn the company in the first place. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Win
Posts: 6 |
|
|||||
|
The way I see it, things don't change too terribly much.
P2P developers simply need to tread a bit more carefully, something they should have been doing from the start anyhow. Put up your P2P program and advertise. "Use this program to share all your family photos and videos with others." and "Please no bad bad infringement stuff while using our program. We don't like it and even though we can't really force you to listen to us, we will really really look down on you like really really bad bad people if you do! .... And be sure to eat all your green vegetables!!!" Gimme a break, really. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
midori kou
Posts: 469 |
|
|||||
|
I say, if you make the technology that can do what it is to be illegal, then you're just asking for trouble. =\
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Darkener
Posts: 33 |
|
|||||
Umm... you forgot dvd recorders, OS companies (ie. Microsoft, Apple, and other Linux distros), and gun makers (using software/gun to kill under person without in self-defense could be counted as the samething...) All types of software and hardware can be used illegally... this is just another awful running by the high court, and how you can justifying is beyond me... BTW, it is only matter of time before the RIAA will sue Apple because the iPod can play illegal copied music, and this ruling only helps their case.
then almost every software maker would be sued... ex. instant messenger and web browser dev.
|
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group