We lost Brand X today and kind of lost Grokster. I can’t find the actual opinions on the Supreme Court site yet, so I can’t tell how good or how bad the latter ruling is. The news reports say that secondary liability depends on whether a company has criminal intent. So one distributor could have bad intent and be liable for infringement and a second could have legitimate intent and be fine selling the identical technology. It may be that the biggest effect of the case is that we won’t see anymore “Rip Mix Burn” advertising, or SBC’s “Faster Downloads”. Speed and flexibility will go underground, and there will be euphemistic marketing instead. Off to mourn Brand X and wait for the official site to post the opinions, which I’ll link to later.
A link to the opinions in Grokster, Brand X and other cases.