The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) is pointing to the Warner v SeeqPod (PDF) copyright complaint, suggesting that the safe harbor provisions in the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) could be tested in the courtsIn essence, there are search engines online today that operate under the idea of 'if it's illegal, tell me and we'll take it down'. Sites like YouTube have a DMCA system where if a copyright holder can electronically complain about an alleged infringement under copyright laws. Such a concept could be put into question in this latest court battle with a member of the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) The complaint says, among other things, Defendant SeeqPod, Inc. (SeeqPod") operates a website - http://www.seeqpod.com - which it publicizes as the Internet's "home for playable search results," a place where users can "crawl the deepest parts of the web" for the "search & discovery of anything that can be played or shared with friends." [...] The results that SeeqPod returns are links - many of which SeeqPod itself solicits from its users - to sites containing unauthorized and illegal copies of copyrighted music. Warner also complains that, SeeqPod aims to capitalize on the illegal use of "free" music to grow its user base rapidly and inexpensively. It may very well be an allusion to the MGM vs Grokster case (a case, in which ZeroPaid interviewed Michael Weiss, CEO of Morpheus who was fighting MGM at the time) Essentially speaking, the case suggested that if you promote your business as a service to intentionally engage in, what the RIAA may suggest, as copyright infringing activities, that you would be liable for the copyright infringement activities of the userbase. It seems as though that Warner is taking this case to an interesting point of view of 'what if your business was merely a search engine instead of a file-sharing client?' It may be something that a search engine like Google may be interested in because if Warner wins, what are the chances that this could pave the way for copyright holders to merely narrow its arguments down to the ability to search for file extensions? A video on YouTube has suggested that Google may be better than LimeWire: "as search engines become more specialized and capable, certain copyright owners have become increasingly dissatisfied with the notice-and-takedown bargain struck in the DMCA. That's what these lawsuits are really about," Fred von Lohmann of the EFF commented, "the defendants are complying with the letter of the law, but copyright owners are now trying to change the rules in court." He further added that the case may likely just be settled out of court much like the iMeem case did. While it may happen, the issue won't go away. Lohmann pointed to the remand of the Perfect 10 vs Google case and figured that the DMCA safe harbor provisions applying to search engines could be tested on that particular case. |
|
members that voted for this story
|
