{
  "id": "RL31998",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL31998",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 310635,
      "date": "2005-07-18",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T19:38:22.897029",
      "title": "File-Sharing Software and Copyright Infringement: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.",
      "summary": "In  Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.,  the Ninth Circuit Court\nof Appeals decision\nconsidered allegations of contributory and vicarious copyright infringement by companies which\ndistribute peer-to-peer file-sharing software. The software facilitates direct copyright infringement\nby its users. It was the first decision to reject infringement claims against and find in favor of\ncompanies distributing the software. Other digital media file-sharing software decisions found in\nfavor of the copyright holders, most notably  A & M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. \nand  In re: Aimster\nCopyright Litigation.  But in  Grokster , the court granted summary judgment for\nthe software\ncompanies. The court thus became the first to accept the \"substantial, noninfringing uses\" defense\nto copyright infringement liability, a defense developed by the U.S. Supreme Court in connection\nwith use of VCRs in  Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.  \n In a unanimous 9-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit, finding that\nit had misapplied  Sony . It articulated a new standard for the imposition of secondary\nliability for\ncopyright infringement, namely \"inducement.\" The Court held that one who distributes a device\n\"with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other\naffirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third\nparties.\" Although firmly rooted in the common law, the Court imported the \"inducement\" theory\nto copyright law much as it had adopted the safe harbor from infringement liability in\n Sony  from\npatent law.\n The Court was careful to preserve the safe harbor for dual use technology established by\n Sony . \n Sony  bars secondary liability based on presuming or imputing intent to cause\ninfringement solely\nfrom the design or distribution of a product capable of substantial lawful use, which the distributor\nknows is in fact used for infringement. Inducement of copyright infringement may be demonstrated\nwhen an actual purpose to cause infringing use is shown by evidence independent of design and\ndistribution of the product.\n This report examines the background and holding in  Grokster  and the doctrinal\nrelationship\nbetween  Sony  and  Grokster . It will not be updated.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL31998",
          "sha1": "9331936a8803ae460533d3965d7e8a7d8c471fc6",
          "filename": "files/20050718_RL31998_9331936a8803ae460533d3965d7e8a7d8c471fc6.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL31998",
          "sha1": "d0ae8fa4523efd672dbbdf8246a62cda1f2a6eec",
          "filename": "files/20050718_RL31998_d0ae8fa4523efd672dbbdf8246a62cda1f2a6eec.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": []
}