3 ms·
There seems to be legal precedent for holding GitHub liable for distributing software that encourages piracy according to MGM v Grokster[1]. Unless I'm reading
by pickdenis 6y ago
There seems to be legal precedent for holding GitHub liable for distributing software that encourages piracy according to MGM v Grokster[1]. Unless I'm reading that incorrectly, if they can prove that the software "promotes" the infringement, the claim will stand.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM_Studios,_Inc._v._Grokster,_Ltd.#Opinion_of_the_Court https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM_Studios,_Inc._v._Grokster,...
- throwaway2048 6y agoThat doesn't mean its subject to the DMCA
- greglindahl 6y agoMGM vs Grokster is different than Someone vs Github vs Popcorn time. There's an extra level of indirection in there.
- pickdenis 6y agoI'm not convinced the courts will see much of a difference between "company (Grokster) that encourages easy p2p piracy through its software" and "company (GitHub) that publicly hosts software that promotes easy p2p piracy".
- greglindahl 6y agoThat's certainly possible. But it's important to note that it's not a direct precedent. You'd lose points in law school for that.
- URSpider94 6y agoNo. The maintainers of Popcorn Time might be able to be held accountable, but GitHub is a platform. As long as GitHub follows the take-down process laid out by the DMCA, they have what is called "safe harbor", which means that they are immunized from claims for copyright infringement.