MGM v. Grokster

Law and IT
35 minutes, 12.1mb, recorded 2004-08-25

Tim Wu, Denise Howell, Charles Petit and Fred von Lohmann

On August 19th, 2004, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decided whether distributors of peer-to-peer filesharing software, such as Grokster and StreamCast, could be held liable for the copyright infringements of their users. The court said that, under the circumstances, no they could not.

Fred von Lohmann of the EFF, who argued the case on behalf of StreamCast, explains why the case is important to technologists and innovators. Charles Petit, an advocate for artists, musicians, and writers, talks about what the case does not say. Denise Howell, an IP lawyer with Reed Smith, puts the decision in the context of the Supreme Court's famous Betamax decision. Law professor (and former Supreme Court clerk) Tim Wu, talks about the potential for the case to go to the Supreme Court.

Learn much more about the decision, including the crucial questions of whether the Ninth Circuit decision in Grokster conflicts with the Seventh Circuit's decision in the Aimster case and what this case means for pending legislation such as the INDUCE Act.

This program is one of a series, The Importance of...Law and IT, hosted by Ernest Miller.

This free podcast is from our The Law and IT with Ernest Miller series.