Monday, April 28, 2003

Judge Finds That 2 File-Sharing Programs Don't Violate Copyright Law By SCOTT CARLSON A federal judge in Los Angeles ruled on Friday that two well-known file-sharing services are not responsible for illegal copying of movies and music by the services' users. The entertainment industry, which brought the suit, has vowed to appeal. The case involved Grokster Ltd., which distributes a popular peer-to-peer file-sharing program, and StreamCast Networks Inc., the distributor of the file-sharing program Morpheus. The entertainment industry alleged that the creators of the file-sharing programs were liable for copyright infringement because the programs could be used to swap copyrighted movies and songs. Under previous court rulings, a company can be liable for others' use of its products to violate copyrights -- known as contributory infringement -- if the company knows about the infringement and contributes to it or fails to stop it. However, the company may not be liable for contributory infringement if the company's product also can be used for purposes that do not infringe on copyrights. In an order granting summary judgment in favor of Grokster and StreamCast, Judge Stephen V. Wilson of U.S. District Court in Los Angeles acknowledged that people used the file-sharing programs to violate copyright, but said that the companies were not liable for that activity. He cited a 1984 U.S. Supreme Court decision in a case by Universal City Studios against Sony Corporation of America, a manufacturer of videocassette recorders. In that case, because VCR's were found to have valuable capabilities for noninfringing use, Sony was not guilty of contributory infringement. The case for Grokster and Morpheus is comparable, Judge Wilson ruled. Grokster, for example, has had valuable noninfringing uses in promoting and distributing the music of independent bands and musicians. Also, the judge noted that to be liable for contributory infringement, a company must know about specific infringing activities and must be able to do something about them. The distributors of Grokster and Morpheus cannot be sure how someone is going to use the peer-to-peer software when the person downloads it, so the companies are not responsible for misuse, he said. The judge said that the file-sharing companies "may have intentionally structured their businesses to avoid secondary liability for copyright infringement, while benefiting financially from the illicit draw of their wares." But he said that the entertainment companies "invite this Court to expand existing copyright law beyond its well-drawn boundaries" -- a step the judge was unwilling to take. Judge Wilson's ruling may bode well for four college students who recently were sued by the recording industry for running file-sharing systems on local networks at three colleges (The Chronicle, April 18). Although none of the four students has yet responded to the allegations in detail, one filed a legal document on Wednesday that touched on some of the same arguments made by Judge Wilson. In the filing, Joseph Nievelt, a student at Michigan Technological University, asked a federal judge in Michigan to dismiss the suit against him. Mr. Nievelt said that his computer program merely indexed computer files on the university's network that were available for downloading. Students shared "research, notes, and other work product" through the program, which acts like a card catalog in that the program itself does not make copies of files on the network, Mr. Nievelt's lawyers wrote. Hilary Rosen, the chief executive officer of the Recording Industry Association of America, expressed disappointment at the decision from Judge Wilson. "Businesses that intentionally facilitate massive piracy should not be able to evade responsibility for their actions," she said in a statement. "We disagree with the District Court's decision that these services are not liable for the massive illegal piracy that their systems encourage and we will immediately appeal" Cindy A. Cohn, a legal director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which defended StreamCast Networks, said the decision takes some pressure off of colleges and universities. "Universities have felt that they have potential liability because their general-purpose systems are used by some students for illegal activity. If there was any confusion on that point, I think this decision reinforces the fact that the mere providers of a multipurpose technology are not responsible for every possible misuse of that technology." Judge Wilson's embracing of the Sony case was also good for innovation in higher education, she said. "Technologists who make tools that have infringing and noninfringing uses are not responsible and don't have to ask Hollywood for permission. The academic community includes some of the people who make those tools. I think there has been a chilling of innovation in that area." "There is nothing about this decision that says that infringing is OK," she added. "It is really about limiting copyright holders from seeking remedy from third parties for infringement." The decision was also welcomed among those in higher education who study technology and law. "For higher education, and networking technologies in general, it's a very positive decision," said Tracy B. Mitrano, director of Cornell University's Computer Policy and Law Program. "To claim that file sharing itself is illegal, in my opinion, does not have any basis in law. If a judge had found that claim had basis in law, it would wreak havoc on network communications as we know them. Many mail programs are considered a file-sharing program." Background articles from The Chronicle: Recording Industry Sues 4 Students for Allegedly Trading Songs Within College Networks (4/18/2003) Film Studio Sends Hundreds of Letters to Colleges, Alleging Illegal Downloading (3/21/2003) Colleges Told to Block Illegal File Sharing (3/14/2003) Recording Industry Plans to Accelerate Complaints About Illegal File Sharing (1/3/2003) Higher-Education Organizations Urge a Crackdown on Illegal File-Sharing (10/25/2002) Colleges Could Face Lawsuits Over Software Piracy (10/25/2002) New Company Besieges Colleges With Notices About Copyright Violations (11/30/2001) Easy-to-print version E-mail this article

Brown U. professor who may have SARS is quarantined; some students are being monitored Disease disrupts ETS testing in China; Beijing tries to seal off universities Business-school accrediting group adopts new standards, providing more leeway on faculty qualifications Faculty union in Calif. community-college district agrees to salary cuts to avoid layoffs East Tennessee State U. will cut football program after fall season Students need better preparation for college-level writing, report says University of Chicago economist wins Clark Medal Spring commencement speakers are announced by 19 colleges Colleges find more applicants through personalized Web recruiting Judge finds that 2 file-sharing programs don't violate  copyright law