The reason why P2P companies believe they are entitled to this protection is because 20 years ago, Hollywood and technology clashed over the Video Cassette Recorder. Sony Corp. vs. Universal City Studios came to the conclusion that Sony could not be held responsible for any pirating done with its hardware because it had many legitimate purposes. So this time around Hollywood want the Supreme Court not to rule on the significant "non-infringing" purposes, but on what it claims is the software’s main purpose.
Hollywood studios claim that P2P companies rely on mass copyright infringement to stay in business. P2P software usually comes with some form of advertising, which generates revenue for the P2P Company. Intel, whose own growth mirrors the rise of the digital age, told the court the entertainment industry is seeking to rewrite the rules that are the building blocks of the information economy. "Here's the core problem, not just for Intel, but all the companies that innovate around Intel's products," said James M. Burger, a Washington attorney who prepared Intel's brief. "How do you know what your product is going to be used for out of the box?"
Source:
Yahoo
Written by: James Delahunty @ 3 Mar 2005 17:43
