p2pnet.net News:- The Big Music cartel killed Napster and, to all intents and purposes, resurrected it when it shoe-horned it into Penn State University at the launch of its (Big Music’s) highly successful scheme to turn senior US teaching institutions into record label marketing divisions, with staff acting as sales units.

Now it’s pay-back time and Napster’s latest owner, Roxio-that-was, has joined MusicNet and CinemaNow in a brief to support the entertainment industry’s bid to have MGM vs Grokster overturned, as Slyck’s Michael Ingram points out.

Twenty-eight of the world’s largest entertainment companies sued the makers of Morpheus, Grokster, and Kazaa, aiming to set a precedent to use against other technology companies (P2P and otherwise).

The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) is representing Morpheus owner StreamCast Networks and it says, “As we noted in our arguments before the Ninth Circuit, the case raises a question of critical importance at the border between copyright and innovation: When should the distributor of a multi-purpose tool be held liable for the infringements that may be committed by end-users of the tool?”

US courts have already answered that question. Twice. But their clear and unanimous rulings weren’t to Hollywood’s liking and it’s now calling in its markers with the likes of Napster II.

Third time lucky, the entertainment industry is hoping in its appeal of the previous decisions which ruled the distributors of the Grokster and Morpheus p2p applications can’t be held liable for users’ copyright infringements.

Its bid to get this plain, unequivocal and unanimous court decision overturned is being staged – and we use the word advisedly – before the Supreme Court of the United States on March 29.

“In the brief, Napster tries to make a scapegoat of Grokster for virtually everything,” says Ingram. “This ranges from scam sites saying their service is ‘100% legal,’ to the industry dragging their feet on digital content licensing.

“Having content and flexibility limited by the entertainment industry must a severe handicap for Napster, but Napster needs to turn to the RIAA to help them improve their service, not to blame P2P for emphasizing the short-comings.”

Ingram is quote correct. The RIAA was, after all, largely responsible for reviving Napster in the first place.

Go here for a complete list of briefs and other relevant documentation.

Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net

===================

See:-
points out – Napster Does 180, Slyck, February 19, 2005
Twice – Grokster v Hollywood, reloaded, p2pnet, January 25, 2005

This entry was posted on Sunday, February 20th, 2005 at 3:23 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

HOME

Viewed 1856 times