Feeds

Morpheus maker loses US case

Streamcast downcast

Security for virtualized datacentres

Another file-sharing software maker has been found guilty of causing copyright infringement. A US judge has said that the Morpheus software produced by StreamCast breaks the law.

New developments in online selling and the lawThe ruling is another victory for the entertainment industry, which has had a string of recent victories and concessions. Just weeks ago Kazaa settled with the music industry for $100 million.

MetaMachine was ordered to pay $30m to settle a copyright suit earlier this month over its eDonkey and Overnet file sharing software. Napster shut down and only the brand survived, now fronting an authorised download site and Grokster has been shut down by courts.

In 2003 Judge Stephen Wilson ruled that StreamCast could not be held responsible for the actions of its software's users, a decision that was backed by the appeals courts. Last year, though, the Supreme Court in the US ruled that file sharing software companies were liable for the software's use because they encouraged or induced users to commit copyright theft.

The Supreme Court then sent the case back to Delaware and to Wilson, who has delivered his revised judgment.

"In the record before the court, evidence of StreamCast's unlawful intent is overwhelming," he wrote this time around in his judgment. Granting a motion for summary judgment against StreamCast, he said that there was evidence of "massive infringement" on the StreamCast network.

The suit had begun in 2001 when a coalition of film studios, music publishers and record labels sued StreamCast as part of the MGM v Grokster case, in which many other companies were named. After the Supreme Court ruling, which covered all the named companies, Streamcast was the only company to continue to fight its case. An appeal against the ruling is still possible.

RIAA chairman Mitch Bainwol said in a statement that "this court has spoken clearly, powerfully and persuasively to the principle that businesses based on theft will be held accountable."

Copyright © 2006, OUT-LAW.com

OUT-LAW.COM is part of international law firm Pinsent Masons.

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know
'Missy' Cummings on UAVs, smartcars and dying from boredom
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
The 'fun-nification' of computer education – good idea?
Compulsory code schools, luvvies love it, but what about Maths and Physics?
Doctor Who's Flatline: Cool monsters, yes, but utterly limp subplots
We know what the Doctor does, stop going on about it already
'Cowardly, venomous trolls' threatened with TWO-YEAR sentences for menacing posts
UK government: 'Taking a stand against a baying cyber-mob'
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.