[Fwd: [ALA-WO:868] MGM Studios v. Grockster - libraries join amicus brief]

Subject: [Fwd: [ALA-WO:868] MGM Studios v. Grockster - libraries join amicus brief]
From: "Olga Francois" <ofrancois@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 16:16:28 -0400
FYI...

-------- Original Message --------
ALAWON: American Library Association Washington Office Newsline
Volume 12, Number 89
September 29, 2003

In This Issue: MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. - libraries join
amicus brief

ALA and the other four major U.S. library associations joined in filing
an amici curiae (friends of the court) brief on September 26 in the case
of MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., which is on appeal in the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  The ACLU took the lead in
writing the brief in support of the defendants, the companies Grokster
and Morpheus which offer peer-to-peer file-trading software. 
 
The record companies and movie studios sued the companies for
contributory infringement and vicarious liability.  A U.S. district
court in California applied the Ninth Circuit's holdings in its decision
in the Napster case to the facts here, and concluded that Grokster and
Morpheus could not be held secondarily liable for the infringements of
users of their software.  The district court also relied on the ruling
of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Sony (Betamax) case in 1984 when it
held that the makers of the VCR should not be held liable for copyright
infringement simply because the device could be used for infringing
purposes.  The district court found that it was undisputed that there
are substantial non-infringing uses for the file-sharing software, such
as to share public domain materials and government documents.  
 
The brief pointed out that the amici do not support the wrongful
sharing of copyrighted materials.  Instead, we believe the Supreme Court
ruled correctly in the Sony/Betamax case. The court in that case created
fair and practical rules which, if overturned, would as a practical
matter give the entertainment industry a veto power over the development
of innovative products and services.  We argue that free speech and the
public interest are best served by rules that allow new and innovative
mediums of communication to develop and flourish. 
 
The lower court decision and all the briefs that have been filed to
date can be found at the Electronic Frontier Foundation web site:
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/ 



******
ALAWON (ISSN 1069-7799) is a free, irregular publication of the
American Library Association Washington Office. All materials subject to
copyright by the American Library Association may be reprinted or
redistributed for noncommercial purposes with appropriate credits.

Current Thread