Grokster didn’t earn any profit from these files, but MGM sued for vicarious copyright infringement through their sharing. Metro-Goldwyn Mayer Studios Inc v Grokster Ltd. Reference: 27/06/2005. in MGM v. Grokster addressed some, but by no means all, of the copyright law issues that may confront P2P developers and other technologists in the future.

Grokster…

Facts. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd. Case History In 1999 , college student Shawn Fanning introduced Napster, one of the first file-sharing applications released on the Internet. Last summer's anticipation of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. et al.

This video shares the background information to the case MGM v Grokster created by Business Law Group 10. DECISION: The US District Court approved that anyone who used the software had directly infringed on the copyrights but was also in favor of Grokster being liable for the distribution of current versions of their software. Court: Supreme Court of the United States of America. If these courtroom skirmishes yield any lesson for P2P developers, it is that a legal strategy needs to be in place early, preferably at the beginning of development, rather than bolted on at the end. v. Grokster Ltd., et al. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. (MGM) v. Grokster, LTD Case Brief - Rule of Law: When a distributor takes affirmative steps to foster infringement through the use of its product, the distributor will be liable for that infringement conducted by 3rd parties. Judge: Souter, Ginsberg, Kennedy, Breyer, Stevens, O'Connor JJ and Rehnquist CJ.