What the Appeal Judge wrote

The Judgment in the MGV vs Grokster case makes fascinating reading. Here’s Para 10:

“While Grokster and StreamCast in particular may seek to be the ‘next Napster,’ …, the peer-to-peer file-sharing technology at issue is not simply a tool engineered to get around the holdings of Napster I and Napster II. The technology has numerous other uses, significantly reducing the distribution costs of public domain and permissively shared art and speech, as well as reducing the centralized control of that distribution. Especially in light of the fact that liability for contributory copyright infringement does not require proof of any direct financial gain from the infringement, we decline to expand contributory copyright liability in the manner that the Copyright Owners request.”