Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MGM v. Grokster: Here's Why P2P is Valuable

Posted by jamie on from the spelling-it-out dept.

Briefs defending Grokster's right to exist were filed yesterday in MGM v. Grokster, from Intel, Creative Commons [PDF], and many others. Among them, 17 computer science professors laid out the case for P2P, beginning with principles: "First, the United States' description of the Internet's design is wrong. P2P networks are not new developments in network design, but rather the design on which the Internet itself is based." Pointedly, the EFF compares this case's arguments to those made over 20 years ago in the Betamax case, which established the public's right to use video-copying technology, because of its "substantial non-infringing uses," even though many used videotape to infringe copyright. We'll soon see whether that right will extend to peer-to-peer software: the Supreme Court takes this up on March 29th.

3 of 732 comments (clear)

  1. Will We Get a Landmark Ruling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This will be interesting, but I'm a little nervous about *where* the Supreme Court will take this one. Applying constitutionality to modern technology is a little tricky; Roe v Wade, for instance, gave us a ruling based on the combined interpretation of several amendments resulting in a "right to privacy."

    Are p2p networks covered by our right to gather? Our right to associate? Our right to privacy? Which amendments will apply to the laws being challenged?

    I certainly hope for a ruling favorable towards p2p. But not just for p2p--also because whatever ruling gets handed down will likely set a lot of precedent for other cases where corporate interests weigh in against developing technology.

    Free Sony PlayStation Portables from Gratis.

  2. Substantial non-infringing uses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I make it a point to make available on Gnutella the US Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers, works by Thoreau, Poe and Twain, along with mp3's of early jazz blues albums all of which is in the public domain. I consider this my contribution to "Substantial non-infringing uses", I encourage everyone to do the same.

  3. Re:I'm not confident -- Oh, The Children, sob... by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 4, Interesting
    44% of the Supreme Court thought its fine to execute children.

    And 100% of those "children" thought it was just fine to execute other human beings. Some of them even felt it was okay to execute other human beings because they were children still, and therefore the state couldn't do anything really bad to them.

    Those are not people I want to live beside afterwards. So just where are your priorities?

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."