[Reader-list] Judges and iPods : MGM vs. Grokster

[Shuddhabrata Sengupta]

Dear all,

(apologies for cross posting to members of the Reader List and Commons Law)

I have been spending some quality time recently enhancing my tastes in 
music, augmenting my fledgeling itunes music collection, and getting 
myself an education in the wilder shores of hip hop, apart from 
collecting a few rare Glenn Gould recordings, thanks to the generosity 
of digital technology, a community of p2p users and the internet. Now, 
as some of you must be aware, this is the kind of activity that 
grandmothers and teenagers have faced fines, and prison sentences for. 
Naturally, this causes me some anxiety, as I cannot afford a fine, and 
have no intention of doing time. The fate of millions of people like me, 
will be decided in the days to come in the United States (and hence will 
set precedents elsewhere) in the MGM vs. Grokster case that is now being 
heard in the United States supreme court. I append below, a report on 
the ongoing  legal battel, which appeared in the New York Daily news and 
is written by Errol Louis.

What I found particularly striking in this report was the image that it 
gives us of a US Supreme Court bench, with an average age of 70 between 
them, arch conservatives as well as committed liberals, seeming to come 
together (which happens very rarely) singing praises of the iPod, even 
as the lawyers representing the music and movie companies that claim to 
speak for and to young audiences, argued against technological innovation.

Enjoy, and now I must return to my musical self education project

Shuddha

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Music moguls on wrong side of copyright fight
Errol Louis

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/295250p-252770c.html

The Supreme Court bars reporters from bringing technology into the main 
chamber where arguments get heard. No cell phones, laptops, tape 
recorders or cameras of any kind; pen and pad are the only tools 
allowed. A similar low-tech spirit governs the court's nonpublic work 
areas, including its nearly computer-free law library. The building only 
got Internet access two years ago.

But during a landmark technology case argued before the court this week, 
MGM vs. Grokster, the nine justices, average age 70, almost sounded like 
teenage gadget freaks, firmly wedded to the high-tech wonders of the 
day. Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter and Stephen Breyer all sang 
the praises of the iPod.

To make the irony complete, lawyers representing the youth-centered 
movie and music industries came off like tech-averse stiffs, begging for 
legal weapons to battle a tidal wave of digital innovation that's 
turning the business of culture upside down.

Grokster, Morpheus and a handful of other companies distribute 
peer-to-peer software that allows computer users to swap digital files 
of documents, images, music and movies. Music files - perfect digital 
copies taken from original CDs - get downloaded 2.6 billion times a 
month, and half a million movies are downloaded every day.

The moguls who run America's movie studios and music labels failed to 
understand the digital revolution would transform their industries - and 
were equally blind to market resentment over constantly rising prices 
charged for mediocre music and movie fare.

Studios with the nerve to charge $10 a head for "Booty Call" or "Gigli" 
were practically begging for audience retaliation. By downloading movies 
for free, the public is telling Hollywood what such piffle is really worth.

Music labels that once invested time and care to cultivate songwriters 
and musicians have been swallowed by profit-obsessed conglomerates that 
now rely on one-hit wonders by overhyped, underdeveloped performers to 
meet quarterly Wall Street targets. Rather than waste money on 
uninspired CDs, many listeners pick the hits they like via Grokster and 
ignore the rest.

In the past, the entertainment industry bitterly complained about - but 
ultimately survived - the player piano, the phonograph and the VCR, 
although many users of these gadgets routinely violate copyrights. The 
justices, who have lived through many of these transformations, hammered 
the entertainment business from the bench.

Arch-conservative Justice Antonin Scalia complained that making Grokster 
liable for free downloading might cause digital entrepreneurs to be sued 
the day after going into business. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a 
liberal who normally disagrees with Scalia, wondered how anyone could 
prove Grokster caused its users to make illegal downloads.

The suits in the entertainment business should brace for bad news when 
the decision comes down. They may actually have to use the one weapon 
needed to compete with Grokster: creativity.

Originally published on April 1, 2005