Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.

518 F.Supp. 2d 1197 (2007)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Under Ps' proposed permanent injunction D would be enjoined from directly or indirectly infringing Ps' copyrighted works in any manner, which also includes D's 'enabling, facilitating, permitting, assisting, soliciting, encouraging, authorizing, inducing, or knowingly materially contributing to' such infringement. P would be barred from operating the Morpheus System and Software, or any other similar peer-to-peer or file-trading system until there is a 'robust and secure means exhaustively to' stop infringement. D would be required to 'use all technologically feasible means to prevent or inhibit' the infringement of Ps' copyrights by end-users through any version of the Morpheus Software in existence. Until D is able to 'exhaustively' stop all infringement, it would also be barred from displaying advertising on all Morpheus Software versions. In the September 27, 2006 Order granting Ps' motion for summary judgment, the court held that no reasonable factfinder can conclude that D provided OpenNap services and distributed Morpheus without the intent to induce infringement. The findings of fact were: (1) D's software was used overwhelmingly for infringing purposes; (2) D targeted a known community of infringers -- former Napster users; (3) D provided technical assistance to aid users in their enjoyment of illegally downloaded content; (4) D thwarted enforcement efforts by copyright holders; (5) D's business model depended on massive infringing use; and (6) D took no meaningful steps to prevent infringement. The Court held that the evidence is overwhelming. D maintains that any requirement to filter is improper and not required under the law. Even so, D presented evidence of best efforts regarding filtering software. Ps submitted a declaration indicating that in December 2006, after the institution of P's new filtering software, it was still possible to illegally download each of the Top 40 songs on the Billboard chart. D determined that the artists' names from the RIAA website (it used for its filter software) only included gold and platinum artists. 'It was possible that current Top 40 artists who did not reach gold and platinum standings would not be on the RIAA website.' D has since taken steps to add all 'Top 40' artist names to its filtering database. D also stands ready to include in its filter any artist names, hash values, or file names that the Ps provide. D further asserts that it has added 'popular song titles, movie titles, and television titles' to its keyword filter, as well as common misspellings made known to the company. D claims that it has disabled access to video files in excess of 10 minutes in length as of January 18, 2007. Ps asserts the following implementation flaws: (1) StreamCast filters only by artist, not by title name; (2) StreamCast does not filter common misspellings or variations; (3) StreamCast only collects hashes for its database four times a day; (4) the size filter of 100 MB does not capture 30-minute television shows, especially when D cannot identify a file's 'runtime'; (5) D does not filter all file types, including 'rar' files that 'can break up large files into numerous pieces, send them in pieces, and then reassemble them on the other end.' Ps argue that D's filter is technologically outdated, substantially because of its failure to incorporate 'digital fingerprinting' technology such as acoustical fingerprinting. Ps claim D must implement file hashes and acoustical fingerprinting.