New Developments in E- Commerce: Legal Issues Professor Nancy King Oregon State University Aarhus School of Business.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
THEORIES OF SECONDARY LIABILITY FOR INFRINGEMENT Contributory Infringement Contributory Infringement (1) With knowledge of direct infringing activity (2)
Advertisements

ON-LINE INFRINGEMENT OF MUSICAL COPYRIGHT: THE UK LEGAL PERSPECTIVE Presentation to British Computer Society Seminar on “IT’s Music Industry” on 18 October.
Secondary Liability Under U.S. Copyright Law Paula Pinha, Attorney-Advisor U.S. Copyright Office East Africa Regional Seminar on: Copyright Enforcement.
Intellectual Property Image: William J. Wynn.
ENGR 101/HUM 200: Technology and Society November 28, 2005.
February 9, 2005Internet Caucus1 MGM v. GROKSTER AND ITS AFTERMATH Pamela Samuelson, UC Berkeley, Internet Caucus, February 9, 2005.
Tackling Online Piracy without Harming Consumer Rights IES - IBBT Workshop Strengthening the European Information Society - Consumers in Media Policy and.
Copyright Infringement Present by: Shao-Chuan Fang Jaime McDermott Emily Nagin Michael Piston Fan Yang Carnegie Mellon Group Presentation Date:
Intellectual property Copyright law and what it means to a working journalist.
Secondary Liability & ISP Liability Limitations Ben Hardman Attorney - Advisor Office of Intellectual Property Policy & Enforcement USPTO.
Copyrights1 By Saud Al-Harbi & AbdulAziz Al-Shamrani.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 4, 2009 Copyright – Indirect, Digital Issues.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 1, 2008 Copyright – Digital Issues.
Copyright and P2P Edward W. Felten Dept. of Computer Science Princeton University.
Grokster Bart Wagner. Shut Down Grokster, which lost in the Supreme Court a lawsuit filed by Hollywood to stop illegal file sharing on peer-to-peer networks,
Internet Legal Issues (Management 447)
Port 21 (Distribution and Promotion Remix) Brian Geoghagan Winter 2005 COM546 Professor Gill.
Feb. 7, 2005IS 296A: Sony Betamax case1 Sony v. Universal Pamela Samuelson IS 296A(2) February 7, 2005.
Week 3: File sharing.
Indirect Infringement Prof Merges Agenda Indirect Liability Remedies (briefly)
SHAWN WILLIAMS The War on File Sharing Companies.
Intellectual Property
How to Read a Court Decision. Structure of reasoning Structure of reasoning First understand the reasoning, so you can critique it First understand the.
P2P File Sharing: The Digital Dilemma ITED 8100 Group Project: Cathie Arnold, Melissa Barker, and Allen Bullock.
Intellectual Property Rights and Online File Sharing Erwin Solis Antoine Herve Matt Olsen Nikolai Hart Tim Scott.
Intellectual Property Part 2 Copyright and Fair Use
Andrew, Lachlan and Han ONLINE PIRACY.  Copyright infringement, or ‘piracy’, is the unauthorized use of works under copyright, infringing the copyright.
1 CPTWG MEETING #91 September 8, 2005 Legislative/Regulatory Update Jim Burger CPTWG MEETING #91 September 8, 2005 Legislative/Regulatory.
California Law Legal Research January 28,2011. APPELLATE PROCESS FACTUAL DISPUTE IS RESOLVED AT TRIAL COURT(NO CASE LAW RESULTS) LOSING PARTY FILES APPEAL.
Finishing Up Fair Use; More on Copyright
1 CPTWG MEETING #96 April 18, 2006 Legislative/Regulatory Update Jim Burger CPTWG MEETING #96 April 18, 2006 Legislative/Regulatory.
Eric J. Pritchard One Liberty Place, 46 th Floor 1650 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (215)
IP part 2: fair use, the music cases, other kinds of IP CS 340.
CS110: Computers and the Internet Intellectual Property.
1 Patent Law in the Age of IoT The Landscape Has Shifted. Are You Prepared? 1 Jeffrey A. Miller, Esq.
Intellectual Property (Part 1)
Vulnerabilities in peer to peer communications Web Security Sravan Kunnuri.
Intellectual Property in Peer-to-Peer Networks Artsiom Yautsiukhin Natallia Kokash Intellectual Property Law, 18 October 2005.
File Sharing Networks: Sony, Napster, Grokster, Bit Torrent Richard Warner.
Copyright and the DMCA IM 350 Issues in New Media Theory From notes by Steve Baron.
D IRECT I NFRINGEMENT Religious Technology Center v. Netcom On-Line 907 F. Supp (N.D. Cal. 1995)
The Post MGM v. Grokster World New Rules for P2P P2P MEDIA SUMMIT NY.
California Law January 21 Sources of Law. SOURCES OF LAW CONSTITUTIONS CASE LAW STATUTORY LAW ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS LOCAL ORDINANCES Rules of Court.
Private and Public law lesson 5 The impact of EU law on the domestic legal system; implementation of EU law into national legislations; Italy (and EU)
LEGALESE BLONDE RIAA vs. NAPSTER Daniella Nero University of Hawaii at Manoa AMST 334 Sp-13.
p2p challenges law (and vice versa) Charles Nesson October 2, 2004.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2003 Professor Fischer CLASS of April THE LAST CLASS!!!
CHAPTER 1 Overview of U.S. Legal Concepts Copyright © 2015 Carolina Academic Press. All rights reserved.
Digital Copyright II Intro to IP – Prof. Merges [Originally scheduled for ]
The Physical/Virtual Divide Rebecca Giblin Monash University Australia.
A company called Napster was developed. This company encouraged piracy by enabling and allowing its users to trade copyrighted songs through its servers.
Intellectual Property. Confidential Information Duty not to disclose confidential information about a business that would cause harm to the business or.
Slides prepared by Cyndi Chie and Sarah Frye1 A Gift of Fire Third edition Sara Baase Chapter 4: Intellectual Property.
Copyright Infringement Present by: Shao-Chuan Fang Jaime McDermott Emily Nagin Michael Piston Fan Yang Carnegie Mellon Group Presentation Date:
REPUBLIC OF LATVIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Līga Daugaviete Senior Legal Adviser of Energy Division October 26, 2005 Customer Complaints and Dispute.
Cyber Law Title: COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT OF ELECTRONIC COPYING Group Members Amirul Bin Jamil Engku Nadzry Bin Engku Rahmat Mohd Danial Shah Bin Shahzali.
Chapter 9: Internet Law, Social Media, and Privacy
Risk-Based Decision Making (RBDM)
File Sharing Legalities and Ethics
The War on File Sharing Companies
Article III of the Constitution The Courts
Class 19 Copyright, Autumn, 2016 Third-Party Liability
CS 115: COMPUTING FOR The Socio-Techno Web
Cooper & Dunham LLP Established 1887
Copyright Material: What constitutes “Fair Use”?
File Sharing Networks: Sony, Napster, Grokster, Bit Torrent
“Grooveshark was founded in 2006 by three University of Florida students determined to accomplish what the music industry couldn't - make purchasing music.
Article III of the Constitution The Courts
LAW/531T BUSINESS LAW 2019 The Latest Version LAW 531T Entire Course Link
Presentation transcript:

New Developments in E- Commerce: Legal Issues Professor Nancy King Oregon State University Aarhus School of Business

Online Copyright Infringement Decision: MGM Studios v. Grokster (2005, U.S. Supreme Court).Decision: MGM Studios v. Grokster Who are the parties in the case?

Grokster What legal question did the U.S. Supreme Court address in the case? How did the Supreme Court answer this question? Did the lower courts that had previously considered this case answer the legal question the same way?

Grokster Understanding the factual context for the case. How do peer-to-peer file- sharing services work? What is the difference between downloading music and file- sharing of music?

Grokster Understanding the applicable law: What is direct copyright infringement? Was it the subject of the Grokster case? What is indirect or secondary copyright infringement?

Grokster Contributory Copyright Infringement: To Intentionally induce or encourage direct infringement.

Grokster Vicarious Copyright Infringment: To profit from direct infringement while declining to exercise a right to stop or limit it.

Grokster – holding of the case Inducement Theory of Copyright Infringement: ”… one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties.”

Place holder

Grokster Understanding the rationale for the court’s decision: What two competing social or policy values were discussed in case that relate to peer-to-peer networking? Which of these two values did the U.S. Supreme Court think was more powerful and therefore justified the decision it made in this opinion? Why?

Grokster Understanding the legal rules applied in the case. Where did the U.S. Supreme Court get the legal rules (‘the law’) that it applied to resolve this dispute? possibilities: international treaties, constitutions, statutes, court opinions (including those containing common law) and administrative regulations.

Grokster Applying the law from the case to management problems: Assume you are advising a technology company about the meaning of the Grokster case. The company distributes a product that enables users to download and share copyrighted movies.

Grokster Management problem cont’d. At a minimum, what would you advise the technology company to do or not do based on the Grokster case?

Grokster, Management Problem, Cont’d. Does it matter whether the company’s product incorporates peer- to-peer networking software or could other technologies that are capable of being used for copyright infringement also be a problem? The Slingbox Personal Broadcaster

Place holder

Place Holder Impact of Grokster around the world

Post-Grokster in the U.S. File-Sharers’ Hero Changes in the online music industry. Single-mother in Oregon countersues RIAA under RICO