- What happened in the A. & M. Records v. Napster case? How did this ruling impact the legality of uploading/downloading copyright-protected music and videos?
Napster allowed for repeated copying. Whole songs were being downloaded. Effect of album sales found to harm possible future sales. Contributory infringement – napster knew of infringement place and did nothing to stop it. Napsters lack of effort to stop infringement and making money made vicarious infringement also successful.
2.How dose it help define the meaning of "Fair Use?"
Napster – Where the line is drawn. Here, Napster tried arguing that manufacturer is able to sell a staple article of commerce. The whole use of napster was the unauthorized downloading. Sony had more use cases than selling the works.
========================================================================VERSION2=====================================================================
What happened?
Napster released peer to peer software. It was mostly used to transfer copyrighted works. Their software violated vicarious and contributory Copyright Infringement.
Who won?
RIAA
Why did they win?
Napster executives even admitted to knowing that the software was used for unauthorized downloads and loads.
How did the witnesses play a role (how did they go back and forth in their argument)?
Defendant tries to use space shifting defense (converting CD to MP3).
Defendant also tried to argue the new artist program, which wasn’t even made until after they got sued. New artists don’t care about copyright
Defendant tried the Fair Use defense.
Plaintiffs showed that copyright was owned on more than 70% of the music available.
Important terms:
Vicarious: Indirect copyright infringement, just as guilty as other person. If someone violates copyright, someone else is violating it as well.
Vicarious Liability: get in a car accident, but it’s due to manufacturer as well