The Supreme Court issued its long-awaited Grokster decision (PDF version) today. It probably will disappoint those who were hoping for a ringing endorsement of P2P activity. The 1984 Sony decision appers to still apply, insofar as the Court has affirmed that a technology with potentially infringing uses does not automatically expose the developer to copyright liability. However, the Court seems to have established some sort of conduct-based test for determining whether a developer should be held liable for infringement. In other words, did the developer induce users of the technology to engage in infringing activity? This is a pretty vague standard and it will be interesting to see how it evolves in lower court. But if I was the CEO of Grokster or Streamcast, I’d start thinking about moving my operations overseas or looking for a new line of work. Because I don’t think any court is gonna buy the argument that Grokster is all about spreading the complete works of Shakespeare.
r
