Judge Rules Against Streamcast

The only peer-to-peer file sharing company to have sustained its legal battle in court has been found liable for inducing copyright infringement.

<p>
It may be the end of an era: U.S. District Judge Stephen V. Wilson has ruled against <a href="http://www.streamcastnetworks.com/">StreamCast Networks, Inc.</a>, the creators ofthe Morpheus file-sharing software, finding them liable for inducing millions of users to violate copyright laws by illegally exchanging music, video, and other material via the service withoutpermission. Judge Wilson granted the plaintiffs in the case a summary judgement.
</p>

<p>
The case is the same as the now-famous <cite><a href="http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/04-480.pdf">MGM vs. Grokster</a></cite>, in which the U.S. SupremeCourt found that application and service creators could be held liable if their software was mainly used to infringe on copyright. The ruling has been colloquially termed the "InducementDoctrine:" if a software application or service induces its users to violate copyright law, it can be held liable for infringement. Judge Wilson cited email from StreamCast executives asevidence StreamCast’s unlawful intentions, including one message which stated bluntly that StreamCast’s goal was the "get in trouble with the law," because, naturally, it’s a great way tomake the news. (You’ve read this far, haven’t you?)
</p>

<p>
StreamCast was the only file-sharing company to be continuing its battle with the music and movie industries in court; the ruling marks a significant victory for the industry, which, since<cite>MGM vs. Grokster</cite>, has been striking down file sharing services right and left with scarcely a squeal in the legal infrastructure. Grokster, eDonkey, and Kazaa have all shutdown or attempted to convert themselves to legal P2P services.
</p>

<p>
The court did not rule on damages to be paid by Streamcast; technically, the company could be on the hook for up to $150,000 per copyrighted work infringed on the service.
</p>