Grokster Court Case Has Massive Implications For Technology Innovation

MEDIA CENTER PC NEWS

March 30th 2005

Grokster Court Case Has Massive Implications For Technology Innovation

UK visitors click here to buy

Grokster and Streamcast Networks are in the dock today as defendants in a case that could have enormous implications for technology innovation in the future.

At the heart of the case, being heard by the US Supreme Court in Washington, is the argument that peer-to-peer file-sharing networks are legally responsible for the activities of their users and are therefore guilty of copyright infringement. Grokster’s response is that their technology is designed for the sharing of non-copyright material and that it is not their fault if some users abuse the system.

‘Some users’ does of course mean the vast majority of users – approximately 90% according to estimates.

Richard Taranto, on behalf of the defendants, said that such an argument would have outlawed the video recorder and even the home PC – devices with legal uses, but which can also be used for illegal activities. In order to shut down Grokster and Streamcast, Taranto argued that the plaintiffs would have to show they were guilty of ‘wilful ignorance’.

It is hard to believe that Grokster was unaware of the illegal use to which its software would be put, but is this reason alone to outlaw it?

Any future technology innovation, from the exciting to the mundane, could only be developed with all future uses in mind. Would it be worth the risk of a future lawsuit?

MediaCenterPCWorld believes not, and that is why we are supporting Grokster in this case - not because we condone music piracy, but because of the long term implications for the technology industry of a judgement against them.

Add to your favourites

<- What's this?