MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.
| MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. | |
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued March 29, 2005 Decided June 27, 2005 |
|
| Full case name | Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc., et al. v. Grokster, Ltd., et al. |
| Docket nos. | 04-480 |
| Citations | 545 U.S. 913 (more)
125 S. Ct. 2764; 162 L. Ed. 2d 781; 2005 U.S. LEXIS 5212; 75 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1001; 33 Media L. Rep. 1865; 18 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 547
|
| Prior history | Motion to dismiss denied, 243 F. Supp. 2d 1073 (C.D. Cal. 2003); summary judgment granted in part to defendants, 259 F. Supp. 2d 1029 (C.D. Cal. 2003); plaintiffs' motion to dismiss counterclaims granted in part, 269 F.Supp.2d 1213 (C.D. Cal. 2003); affirmed, 380 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2004); cert. granted, 125 S. Ct. 686 (2004) |
| Subsequent history | Remanded by MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster Ltd., 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 17145 (9th Cir., August 15, 2005) |
| Holding | |
| Producers of technology who promote the ease of infringing on copyrights can be sued for inducing copyright infringement committed by their users. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated and remanded. | |
| Court membership | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Souter, joined by unanimous |
| Concurrence | Ginsburg, joined by Rehnquist, Kennedy |
| Concurrence | Breyer, joined by Stevens, O'Connor |
| Laws applied | |
| Copyright Act of 1976 | |
MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., 545 U.S. 913 (2005), is a United States Supreme Court decision in which the Court unanimously held that defendant peer-to-peer file sharing companies Grokster and Streamcast (maker of Morpheus) could be sued for inducing copyright infringement for acts taken in the course of marketing file sharing software. The plaintiffs were a consortium of 28 of the largest entertainment companies (led by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer studios).
The case is frequently characterized as a re-examination of the issues in Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, 464 U.S. 417 (1984) — the "Betamax case", a decision that protected VCR manufacturers from liability for contributory infringement. MGM wants makers of file sharing technology held liable for their users' copyright infringements. In Sony, the court held that technology could not be barred if it was "capable of substantial noninfringing uses."
Grokster came before the Supreme Court having already won in two previous courts. The United States District Court for the Central District of California originally dismissed the case in 2003, citing the Betamax decision. Then a higher court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, upheld the lower court's decision after acknowledging that peer-to-peer ("P2P") software has legitimate and legal uses. Sharman Networks' Kazaa file sharing program was originally amongst the defendants, but was dropped because the company is based in Vanuatu.
...
Wikipedia