« Potential for Confusion about Scotus decision in MGM versus Grokster | Main | Is BitTorrent Protected under Grokster decision? »
June 27, 2005
Continuing discussion of Grokster
Patry on MGM v. Grokster: "I don't know about others, but I view the Court as having punted: they decided mainly an issue that wasn't in front of them (inducement) and didn't decide the one that was, the effect of Sony in the Internet era."
Patry: "The Souter opinion does have a helpful slap down of the Ninth Circuit's bizarre "specific knowledge" requirement, and I think it is a good policy issue about the relationship of strong inducement evidence coupled with a staple article of commerce defense."
Douglas Lichtman on Grokster: "MGM won on paper today, but my first reading of the opinion makes me wonder whether the victory will have any bite outside of this specific litigation."
Lawrence Solum on The Grokster Concurrences: "Ginsburg and Breyer disagree about the meaning of the Sony "substantial noninfring use" test, and that disagreement is potentially important to the future of P2P litigation, and hence to the future of copyright."
see also Grokster by Andrew Raff and EEJD's Summary of Grokster Supreme Court Opinion
Posted by Kevin at June 27, 2005 02:00 PM