Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Entertainment Law & FinanceLJN NewslettersNewsSections

U.S. Supreme Court Justices Offer Mixed Views During Arguments in Landmark 'Grokster' Case

By Stan Soocher
April 29, 2005

WASHINGTON, DC ' The controversy over whether developers and distributors of peer-to-peer file-sharing software should be found liable for contributory and vicarious copyright infringement has been described as the most important copyright case for the entertainment industry in two decades ' or as an issue that Congress ultimately will decide. (That the underlying unlicensed downloading and uploading of entertainment content by consumers is direct infringement has already been made clear by courts.) To this observer in the court's press section, questioning by the U.S. Supreme Court justices during the recent oral arguments in what is known as the Grokster case, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. (MGM) v. Grokster Ltd., 04-480, demonstrated no clear consensus among the justices.

Much of the discussion at the U.S. Supreme Court revolved around how much of a guide the court's previous ruling in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984) should be. In that case, the court decided that sales of videotape recorders didn't constitute contributory copyright infringement despite the fact that manufacturers knew the recorders were used for some infringing purposes. On the court today are just three of the justices who voted in the Sony case: Associate Justice John Paul Stevens, the author of the 5-4 Sony majority decision, Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a centrist and key court swing vote who sided with Stevens in Sony, and Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, a dissenter in the Sony case.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

Judge Rules Shaquille O'Neal Will Face Securities Lawsuit for Promotion, Sale of NFTs Image

A federal district court in Miami, FL, has ruled that former National Basketball Association star Shaquille O'Neal will have to face a lawsuit over his promotion of unregistered securities in the form of cryptocurrency tokens and that he was a "seller" of these unregistered securities.

Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It Image

Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?

Blockchain Domains: New Developments for Brand Owners Image

Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.

Supreme Court Rules Rejection of Trademark License Does Not Rescind Rights of Licensee Image

Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC The question is whether a debtor's rejection of its agreement granting a license "terminates rights of the licensee that would survive the licensor's breach under applicable nonbankruptcy law."