next »

[Forums Moderator]

What will be the impact on higher education of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that commercial makers of file-sharing software can be sued for contributing to copyright infringement? Will more colleges make deals with companies that offer legal downloading services, in an effort to lure students away from illegal file-sharing? Will the decision stifle technological innovation and prevent scholars from legally trading data, video, music, and literature using peer-to-peer networks? Read more...

[James L. Weaver, job seeker]

 Ever since law suits became the #1 indoor sport in America, there have been several legal rulings that address "creativity". As an artist/art instructor, I have very mixed feelings about the recent Supreme Court ruling- On one hand, it might force creatives to hopefully become more original, which would be a welcome change, but it is more likely to supress creativity from pure fear of being sued.- I'm currently making a DVD Movie on my computer that includes images and an accompanying sound track. I have paid $200 to get written permission to use specific images, (for between 1 and 3 seconds, each.) After paying this fee, I have learned that many of these images are in the Public
Domain, and are copyright-free to use. Most major museums and artist registries prefer the public remain uninformed as to Public Domain. That is a bit disappointing, but not surprising, as this truly IS the land of...opportunity!Forums Moderator wrote:

> What will be the impact on higher education of the U.S.
> Supreme Court's ruling that commercial makers of file-sharing
> software can be sued for contributing to copyright
> infringement? Will more colleges make deals with companies that
> offer legal downloading services, in an effort to lure students
> away from illegal file-sharing? Will the decision stifle
> technological innovation and prevent scholars from legally
> trading data, video, music, and literature using peer-to-peer
> networks?
> Read
> more...

[Mississippi Gary]

So, if someone gets pulled over on I 95 and the cop finds a trunk full of pirated DVDs, does that mean the state/federal government are then responsible for copyright infringement because they provided a means for these illeagal DVDs to be transported?

Same thing is it not?
Forums Moderator wrote:

[2 More Cents]

My understanding of the Supreme Court ruling is that it says that companies whose business models are based on copyright infringement can be sued and held responsible for damages.  The simple fact that a piece of software or a technology can be used illegally is not a problem.  The problem is using it illegally.

For example, file sharing -- a legitimate technology -- is acceptable.  Creating a business based on customers' using file sharing technology to violate copyrights is not.