More pointers: grokster, and extradition for copyright infringement
For some particularly interesting commentary on the Grokster hearing in the Supreme Court see:
But as you read these, remember that this passage could never be claimed here in Australian law.
'At least some of the Justices, Scalia in particular, seemed troubled by how an inventor would know, at the time of inventing, how its invention might be marketed in the future. How, some of the Justices asked MGM, could the inventors of the iPod (or the VCR, or the photocopier, or even the printing press) know whether they could go ahead with developing their invention? It surely would not be difficult for them to imagine that somebody might hit upon the idea of marketing their device as a tool for infringement.At the moment, in Australia, ripping your CD to an iPod is illegal. It is an infringement of copyright. And I can assure you that in the various cases currently before the courts, the illegality of any unauthorised copying is one of the foundations of the copyright owners' cases.
MGM’s answer to this was pretty unsatisfying. They said that at the time the iPod was invented, it was clear that there were many perfectly lawful uses for it, such as ripping one’s own CD and storing it in the iPod. This was a very interesting point for them to make, not least because I would wager that there are a substantial number of people on MGM’s side of the case who don’t think that example is one bit legal. But they’ve now conceded the contrary in open court, so if they actually win this case they’ll be barred from challenging “ripping” in the future under the doctrine of judicial estoppel. '
The other pointer for the day is this story in Australian IT: Hew Raymond Griffiths, the man who faces extradition to the United States for criminal copyright infringement, has lodged an application for special leave to appeal with the High Court of Australia, following a judgment by the Full Federal Court allowing extradition to go ahead.
