Does the Sharing of Music Files Through the Internet Violate Copyright Laws?
Michael Gibbons, October 6, 2015, Issue 6
Facts:
The issue at hand is to determine if sharing music files through the internet violates copyright laws. It was found to be illegal to share music through the internet. In the case MGM Studios v. Grokster a unanimous decision was held that Grokster was to “be held liable for violating copyright laws by providing peer-to-peer file sharing software to the public,” (Katsh 98). VCRs were in question and used as an analogy by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) in that “the VCR is to the motion picture industry and the American public what the Boston stranger is to the women alone,” (Katsh 99) in that the majority …show more content…
If software has a legitimate purpose and may be exploited for illegal means that it is not the company’s fault. VCRs were found to be legal even though the majority of users use the product for illegal means because violating copyright laws was not the intended use. It was said that only “10 percent of the copying does not violate copyright laws,” (Katsh 99). How can a machine be legal when only 10% of the time it is used for legal means? A product must have significant legal purposes to be found legal. Companies such as LimeWire settled a lawsuit of “$105 million” to then “be sued by the major film studios,” (Katsh 99). The reasoning was that although the company did not do anything illegal, its software allowed for others to illegal download music and movie files. Justice Ruth Bader wrote that there needs to be “little or no evidence of no- infringing uses, a company that distributes a product used to violate copyright law should be held responsible,” (Katsh 99). A company should be responsible for the software that they create or have accessible on the internet. The internet is accessible to millions and millions of people throughout the world, so if something is put online it will easily be accessible by many people and therefore the company must be held responsible. It was found “that Grokster’s and StreamCast’s products were, and had been for some
Michael Gibbons, October 6, 2015, Issue 6
Facts:
The issue at hand is to determine if sharing music files through the internet violates copyright laws. It was found to be illegal to share music through the internet. In the case MGM Studios v. Grokster a unanimous decision was held that Grokster was to “be held liable for violating copyright laws by providing peer-to-peer file sharing software to the public,” (Katsh 98). VCRs were in question and used as an analogy by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) in that “the VCR is to the motion picture industry and the American public what the Boston stranger is to the women alone,” (Katsh 99) in that the majority …show more content…
If software has a legitimate purpose and may be exploited for illegal means that it is not the company’s fault. VCRs were found to be legal even though the majority of users use the product for illegal means because violating copyright laws was not the intended use. It was said that only “10 percent of the copying does not violate copyright laws,” (Katsh 99). How can a machine be legal when only 10% of the time it is used for legal means? A product must have significant legal purposes to be found legal. Companies such as LimeWire settled a lawsuit of “$105 million” to then “be sued by the major film studios,” (Katsh 99). The reasoning was that although the company did not do anything illegal, its software allowed for others to illegal download music and movie files. Justice Ruth Bader wrote that there needs to be “little or no evidence of no- infringing uses, a company that distributes a product used to violate copyright law should be held responsible,” (Katsh 99). A company should be responsible for the software that they create or have accessible on the internet. The internet is accessible to millions and millions of people throughout the world, so if something is put online it will easily be accessible by many people and therefore the company must be held responsible. It was found “that Grokster’s and StreamCast’s products were, and had been for some