Opening Salvo Filed In MGM v. Grokster

Aire Libre writes "The first brief on the merits before the Supreme Court in MGM Studios v. Grokster was filed Friday (January 21, 2004) by the Video Software Dealers Association. The brief suggests that while p2p systems may be used for infringing and noninfringing uses, courts should consider whether technologies may be used to reduce infringing uses without over-burdening the system provider, freedom of speech for non-infringing uses (including by copyright owners who want p2p systems to be used to reach their audiences) or freedom of competition (including first sale doctrine principles, and competition in providing all intermediate software and services). Bringing a retailer perspective, it strikes a balance of respect for copyright and respect for the limits of those copyrights. The brief is available here (in PDF)."

Comments

Re:This is not good for Grokster

[Azi Dahaka]

I remember AudioGalaxy agreed and permitted the RIAA to flag certain artists/tracks so the files could not be downloaded.

The RIAA discovered that it was not effective in the least. People would simply rename the files.

Considering there is no way effective way (that I know of) to teach Grokster to identify content that should not be shared, I really don't see an alternative to creating a database of hashes or filename patterns, neither of which could stop the sharing.

In other words, Grokster is likely refusing because they understand the futility and the difficulty of creating the easily-circumvented ban lists.