Profile

unixronin: Galen the technomage, from Babylon 5: Crusade (Default)
Unixronin

December 2012

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Monday, June 27th, 2005 05:32 pm

As reported by the BBC among others, the Supreme Court has ruled that file-sharing companies are to blame for what users do with their software.  Lower court ruliings hinged upon, and preserved, the prior Supreme Court Sony Betamax decision which states that a manufacturer cannot be held liable for criminal use of a product with substantial non-infringing utility.  In that decision, the Supremes ruled that the majority of people using a video recorder for legal uses outweighs any illegal use.

But in this latest ruling the judges sets aside [sic] this precedent and the lower court decisions and means the makers of a technology have to answer for what people do with it if they use it to break the law.

  (Garbled syntax courtesy of the BBC.)

I don't know about anyone else, but it seems to me that this has possible bad implications for product-liability suits -- in particular, for the anti-gun lobby's tactic of trying to sue firearms manufacturers for criminal use of their products.


Other news items:

Monday, June 27th, 2005 04:18 pm (UTC)
Sometimes I wonder if the boys over at the BBC know that the text of these decisions is available online. In short, no, the SCOTUS didn't set aside the Sony decision. What it said was that you cannot claim the Sony safe harbor if there is evidence that you're encouraging illegal uses of the technology. The question of if you can be held liable if most of the usage of your technology is illegal, but you're not encouraging it is a split issue right now. Ginsberg, Rehnquist and Kennedy all say yes. Breyers, Stephens and O'Connor disagree. However, for the time being, it is not a settled question.

This ruling isn't much of a surprise. When I was at Napster in 2000, this was exactly the tack that we were taking. Napster did its damndest to promote the legal aspects of file sharing by encouraging bands to put up their own stuff for download. For a while, music owned by Orrin Hatch (he's a song writer) was available on Napster.
Monday, June 27th, 2005 04:31 pm (UTC)
Oh yeah, the whole area's been a minefield from the start. My opinion of Napster has always been that while Shawn Fanning may have had some neat ideas technically, in the arena of making a viable business plan he gave every impression of being a drooling idiot.

The clarification does shed a rather different, and much more positive, light on the ruling.
Monday, June 27th, 2005 08:29 pm (UTC)
An additional note about Tinian - it is my understanding that the Enola Gay (http://www.theenolagay.com/plane.html) was based there.
Monday, June 27th, 2005 09:58 pm (UTC)
Both Enola Gay and Bocks Car flew out of Tinian, iirc.