Show Less
You do not have access to this content

Code Wars

10 Years of P2P Software Litigation

Rebecca Giblin

With reference to US, UK, Canadian and Australian secondary liability regimes, this insightful book develops a compelling new theory to explain why a decade of ostensibly successful litigation failed to reduce the number, variety or availability of P2P file sharing applications – and highlights ways the law might need to change if it is to have any meaningful effect in future.
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 4: The Targeted Response

Rebecca Giblin


By the time Grokster reached the Supreme Court, the US secondary liability law had become hopelessly tangled. This was not helped by the very different approaches taken by the Seventh and Ninth Circuits, which Yen describes as having “rendered the law incoherent”.1 Despite years of litigation, “[t]he only issue on which the lower courts had ruled was whether Grokster qualified for the Sony safe harbor defense to MGM’s contributory infringement claim as to current versions of its software.”2 Against this backdrop the plaintiffs sought and were granted certiorari from the US Supreme Court.3 This chapter explores the new law created in specific response to P2P file sharing, with a close examination of the way in which the US Supreme Court decision dealt with the tangled mess woven by the earlier decisions.

As the highest court in the US geared up to consider secondary liability issues for the first time in two decades (and code-based generative technologies for the first time ever), the matter assumed tremendous significance. Close to 100 amicus briefs were filed, among them arguments advanced by technology companies, content providers, and experts in law, economics and technology.4 Everyone was determined to have a say in the future interpretation of Sony. Everyone, it turned out, except the Supreme Court itself, which, unable to determine exactly what the doctrine meant, passed up the opportunity to resolve the circuit split and decided the matter on a different theory of liability altogether.


You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.