“One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright … is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties using the device, regardless of the device’s lawful uses,” Justice David Souter wrote.
And with those words, the Supreme Court unanimously overturned a lower court ruling and gave Hollywood a significant victory in its fight against illegal distribution of copyrighted material.
And now, the Court will have to define the term “promoting its use to infringe copyright.” But for now, it is clear that Grokster was promoting infringement. I wonder how broadly this will be interpreted by lower courts.
Round 1 goes to Hollywood. But will they be able to swing this stick very broadly? More to follow…
-CyclingRoo-