Oral argumentsĭuring oral argument, the Supreme Court justices appeared divided between the need to protect new technologies and the need to provide remedies against copyright infringement. Billionaire Mark Cuban partially financed Grokster's fight before the Supreme Court. Interestingly, Napster filed a brief in support of the petitioner copyright holders. Sharman Networks' Kazaa file sharing program was originally amongst the defendants, but was dropped because the company is based in Vanuatu.Ĭomputer and Internet technology companies such as Intel, and trade associations including firms such as Yahoo! and Microsoft, filed amicus curiae briefs in support of the file sharing companies, while the RIAA and MPAA both sided with MGM.
Sony betamax case and grokster sand streamcast software#
Then a higher court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, upheld the lower court's decision after acknowledging that peer-to-peer ("P2P") software has legitimate and legal uses. The United States District Court for the Central District of California originally dismissed the case in 2003, citing the Betamax decision. Grokster came before the Supreme Court having already won in two previous courts. In Sony, the court held that technology could not be barred if it was "capable of substantial noninfringing uses." MGM wants makers of file sharing technology held liable for their users' copyright infringements. 417 (1984) - AKA the "Betamax case", a decision that protected VCR manufacturers from liability for contributory infringement. The case is frequently characterized as a re-examination of the issues in Sony Corp.
0 kommentar(er)
