Supreme Court Rules in MGM v. Grokster

On June 27, 2005, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in MGM v. Grokster, ruling that the providers of software that designed to enable “file-sharing” of copyrighted works may be held liable for the copyright infringement that takes place using that software. The Court held that “one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties.”

• Syllabus
• Opinion of the Court
• Concurrence by Justice Ginsburg
• Concurrence by Justice Breyer

Background

United States Files Brief in “File-Sharing” Case

The United States filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief supporting the petitioners (plaintiffs) in MGM Studios Inc., et al v. Grokster, Ltd., No. 04-480 on the Supreme Court's docket. The Supreme Court granted a petition for a writ of certiorari on December 10, 2004. (A writ of certiorari is an order issued by the Supreme Court directing the lower court to transmit records for a case for which it will hear on appeal.)

The Court will decide whether the providers of peer-to-peer “file-sharing” software that is used by great numbers of persons to engage in online copyright infringement can be held liable for those acts of infringement. Argument will be held on March 29, 2005, and a decision is expected by June.

Briefs on the Merits

        Briefs in Support of Petitioners

• Motion Picture & Recording Studio Petitioners
• Songwriter & Music Publisher Petitioners
• United States of America (Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• State Attorneys General (Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• Professors Kenneth Arrow et al. (Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• Law Professors, Economics Professors and Treatise Authors (Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• Professors Menell, Nimmer, Merges, and Hughes (Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners)  
• Commissioner of Baseball et al. (Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• ASCAP (American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers) et al. (Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• Napster, LLC et al. (Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• International Rights Owners (Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• NARAS (National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences) et al. (Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• Defenders of Property Rights (Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• Kids First Coalition et al. (Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• Progress and Freedom Foundation (Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) (Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• Americans for Tax Reform (Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• BSA (Business Software Alliance) (Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• Macrovision, Inc. (Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• AFM (American Federation of Musicians) et al. (Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• NARM (National Association of Recording Merchandisers) (Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners)
• AIPLA (American Intellectual Property Association) (Amicus Curiae in Support of Vacatur and Remand)
• Video Software Dealers Association (Amicus Curiae Suggesting Reversal)

         Briefs in Support of Respondents

• Peer-to-Peer Network Respondents
• Creative Commons (Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Malla Pollack and Other Law Professors (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Law Professors Lee, Shane, and Swire (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Intel Corporation (Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) et al. (Amici Curiae in Support of Affirmance)
• Internet Industry Companies (Cellular Telecommunications & Internet
  Association et al.) (Amici Curiae in Support of Affirmance)
• Economics Professors Oberholzer-Gee and Strumpf (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Law Professors Fisher, Zittrain, and Palfrey (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Law Professor Glynn Lunney et al.  (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Innovation Scholars and Economists (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Internet Law Faculty (Amici Curiae)
• Technology Law Professors and USACM (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Free Software Foundation and New Yorkers for Fair Use (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Musical Artists (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Media Studies Professors (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Charles Nesson (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Computer Science Professors (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• NASCAT (National Association of Shareholder and Consumer Attorneys) (Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• National Venture Capital Association (Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Altnet, Inc. (Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Sharman Networks Ltd. (Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Distributed Computing Industry Association (Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• American Conservative Union and National Taxpayers Union (Amici Curiae in Support of Affirmance)
• ACLU et al. (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Emerging Technology Companies (Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents)
• Eagle Forum Education and Legal Defense Fund (Amici Curiae in Support
  of Respondents)

        Briefs in Support of Neither Party

• Senators Patrick Leahy and Orrin Hatch (Amici Curiae in Support of Neither Party )
• IPO (Intellectual Property Owners Association) (Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Party)
• Audible Magic, Digimarc Corp., and Gracenote (Amici Curiae in Support of Neither Party)
• Digital Media Association et al. (Amici Curiae in Support of Neither Party)
• Snocap, Inc. (Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Party)
• Bridgemar Services, Ltd. d/b/a Imesh.com (Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Party)
• IEEE-USA (The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.) (Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Party)
• Professor Lee Hollaar (Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Party)

       Reply Briefs

• Reply brief for Motion Picture Studio and Recording Company Petitioners
• Reply brief for Songwriter and Music Publisher Petitioners

Briefs on Petition for Writ of Certiorari

     Briefs in Support of Petition

• Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc., et al. (Petition for Writ of Certiorari)
• Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc., et al. (Final Reply)
• AIPLA (American Intellectual Property Association) (Amicus Curiae)
• Recording Artists Coalition et al. (Amicus Curiae)
• ASCAP (American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers) et al. (Amicus Curiae)
• International Rights Owners (Amicus Curiae)
• Law Professors (Amicus Curiae)
• National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences et al. (Amicus Curiae)
• Progress and Freedom Foundation (Amicus Curiae)
• Roxio, Inc. et al. (Amicus Curiae)
• SESAC (Amicus Curiae)
• Commissioner of Baseball et al. (Amicus Curiae)
• State Attorneys General (Amicus Curiae)
• Washington Legal Foundation (Amicus Curiae)

         Briefs in Opposition to Petition

• Grokster, Ltd. (Brief in Opposition)
• CCIA (Computer Communications Industry Association) and Internet Archive (Amicus Curiae)

Download Zip file containing all briefs (large file).