News
Supreme Court rules against file-sharing services
In a unanimous decision today, the Supreme Court ruled that peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing services could be held responsible if their software was intended primarily to swap music and movies illegally.
“We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement,” Justice David Souter wrote in the majority opinion.
Earlier today, financial research firm Piper Jaffray said that Apple’s iTunes Music Store “would be the primary beneficiaryâ€? of a decision against P2P file sharing.
Share This Article & Win an iTunes Gift Card. Next: MusiCase for iPod combines speakers, case
Previous: Mix: P2P ruling, AAPL, Fast Track Studio
Comments
If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.
Recent News
- Enter the CES Exhibits Plus Pass Giveaway today
- Wider distribution boosting iPhone sales in France
- Chinon rolls out AVi portable iPod speaker
- TomTom intros separate Car Kit for iPod touch
- iLounge and MusicSkins announce the Ultimate Design Contest
- Latest edition of iPodweek coming shortly
- Apple planning more iPod touch apps for retail?
- Gameloft, others cutting back on Android development
- Google launches Google News for iPhone, iPod touch
- Magellan releases RoadMate app, Car Kit coming
Recent Reviews
- Electronic Arts Command & Conquer Red Alert
- Bowers & Wilkins Zeppelin Mini
- iHome iHM79 Rechargeable Mini Speakers
- Elexa Consumer Products iBlink
- Bose SoundDock 10
- Shure SE115m+ Sound Isolating Headset
- Apple Remote (2009)
- Kensington Travel Battery Pack and Charger for iPhone
- Tapulous Metallica Revenge
- Electronic Arts NBA Live by EA Sports
Recent Articles
- Ask iLounge 11-20-09
- The Complete Guide to Using the iTunes Store
- iPhone Gems: Brain Challenge 2, Impossible Quiz, Jeopardy, Trivia Wars + Wheel of Fortune
- The Complete Guide to Album Tagging, Art and Playlists in iTunes
- Ask iLounge 11-13-09
- The Complete Guide to iTunes Audiobooks, Podcasts + iTunes U
- Ask iLounge 11-6-09
- iPhone Gems: Asphalt 5 and Doom Classic
- Ask iLounge 10-30-09
- Instant Expert: Secrets & Features of Apple TV 3.0
1
I’m sure people will keep on downloading…
Posted by ipodman715 on June 27, 2005 at 9:41 AM (PDT)
2
Wrong. Article currently reads: “In a unanimous decision today, the Supreme Court ruled that peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing services could be held responsible if its software or network is used primarily to swap music and movies illegally.”
It should read something similar to this: “In a unanimous decision today, the Supreme Court ruled that peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing services could be held responsible if its promotion primarily highlights illegal uses.”
Read the ruling.
Posted by Jesper on June 27, 2005 at 9:52 AM (PDT)
3
Um, Jesper—I assume you’re referring to the above iPodLounge article. If you are, it actually does say “...if their software was intended primarily to swap music and movies illegally.”
Posted by PushButtonAction in Atlanta, GA on June 27, 2005 at 10:29 AM (PDT)
4
What a scary decision.
Let’s not forget that email is a peer-to-peer service.
What copyright holder is going to be the first to sue yahoo, google or m hotmail for its ability to share files? Sounds ridiculous, but that’s where this is all headed.
Posted by Talking Madness in Los Angeles on June 27, 2005 at 10:31 AM (PDT)
5
I don’t think it’s as slipperly slope as some people are thinking. The key to all of this is the intention of the program, was it created for the purpose of an illegal activity? The SC doesn’t even go this far, all the SC is saying is that it’s ok to file a lawsuit against against these P2P services as a secondary defendent. The resulting lawsuit still needs to show the P2P service acted irresponsibly.
It opens a floodgate, but that doesn’t necessarily mean everyone will get swept away.
Posted by Crazy Mike on June 27, 2005 at 11:14 AM (PDT)
6
More money for iTunes and Apple…
Posted by KillerChainsawBunny in Alabama on June 27, 2005 at 11:55 AM (PDT)
7
PushButtonAction: Yes, it does now. They changed it, for which I’m grateful. (Here’s a screenshot the article in my RSS reader which displays changes in the description: http://wootest.net/ipodloungechanged.png )
Posted by Jesper on June 27, 2005 at 1:36 PM (PDT)
8
Here’s the link to the decision on the Supreme Court website…not that anyone here is going to actually read it before commenting…
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/27jun20051200/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-480.pdf
Posted by Talking Madness in Los Angeles on June 27, 2005 at 7:45 PM (PDT)
9
Pretty soon the human race will start to look like frumpy Bill Gates with no gender, and the Supreme Court will be a figment of our imagination hardwired with protection keys. (Isn’t that what Bill is starting to look like anyway?)
Posted by FahrenheiPod 451 on June 27, 2005 at 9:53 PM (PDT)