Mobile/PDA About Us Advertise here


		User name	Password

		Not registered yet? Register here. Lost your password? Click here.

Browse by topic

News

StreamCast asks Supreme Court to reject RIAA/MPAA requests

9 November 2004 13:03 by James "Dela" Delahunty | 5 comments

StreamCast, which owns the Morpheus P2P Network has formally asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reject requests made by the Motion Pictures Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) to revisit lower court decisions that confirm the legality of P2P networks. In August 2004 the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal's said that a verdict casing in stone the legitimacy of P2P software be allowed to stand. In April 2003 a District Court ruling stated that since P2P networks had many legitimate uses, the software's developers can't be held to account if their code is misused.

"It is our belief that there is no need for the Supreme Court to review the matter," said Matthew Neco, StreamCast's general counsel. "The ruling of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the trial court's ruling was based on a perfect understanding of the precedent of the Sony-Betamax case."
In 1984 an attempt was made by the Movie Industry to sue Sony for offering a device that was capable of recording from TV stations. The court rejected this since the device could easily be put to legit uses.

Source:
The Register

Permalink to this article

Supreme Court to hear P2P case (22 January 2005)

P2P users move to TV-Series downloading? (26 November 2004)

Judge slows down MPAA lawsuits (24 November 2004)

P2P use growing despite RIAA claims (23 October 2004)

Supreme Court rejects RIAA appeal (12 October 2004)

P2P case to be tested in Supreme Court? (8 October 2004)

« Previous news article
New U2 album surfaces online

Next news article »
MS expects $100 million first day sales for Halo 2

Post your comment

Discuss this article!
wick780 (Junior Member) 10 November 2004 6:34
Ha, its true. They will be trying to say its illegal to have a dvd recorder or even a computer because they can be used to create illegal media :)~ [ + quote]
jimbusse (Newbie) 10 November 2004 10:00
The US has a history of permitting companies to produce items that are useful to lawbreakers, including guns, cars, knives. I would hope the members of the Supreme Court would prioritize the regulation of items that facilitate lawbreaking. I mean, guns shoot people, cars let drunk drivers navigate, and knives get inside schools. P2P misuse simply lets a very small percentage of the population violate copyrights. I would hope the court would put personal safety issues before copyright issues. [ + quote]
Linkeui (Newbie) 11 November 2004 5:55
They are all overpaid anyway....... [ + quote]
Buik (Member) 11 November 2004 17:31
jimbusse: Anything made can be of use to lawbreakers. And as far as "Safety Issues", being a "Safety Officer/Official" is the job of trying to outsmart IDIOTS. People use guns to shoot people. Drunks drive cars. Students take knives into schools. Those three (3) items are inanimate objects. "People" are who operate or use them. BTW, The Supreme Court of the USA is not a legislative body. Their "Constitutional" duty is to interpret laws, that have been enacted, and determine whether they (and verdicts & such) are constitutional. They are not there to make law. TC [ + quote]
domie (Member) 12 November 2004 16:11
not wanting to open a political can of worms but wasn�t it the supreme court who declared the florida vote recount illegal in 2000 thus allowing bush to become president ?? that was a pretty damn good imitation of passing a law ;) [ + quote]