infringement, like that in Grokster
, may be the kind of control that
with reference to the Supreme Court's holdings in Sony and Grokster
(89) My analysis of Aereo's technical work-around provides a foundation for considering technological avoision as a general matter: much as Grokster
and similar peer-to-peer services developed new architectures to avoid the legal definition for secondary liability, the Aereo service developed a new technical architecture in order to avoid copyright law's definition of public performance.
Many thought that Grokster
would address the same issue--whether file-sharing networks had substantial non-infringing uses, such as sharing files that were not subject to copyright or for which the copyright owner had granted permission.
ONLINE 547, 54950 (2014) (discussing how Grokster
Unlike in Sony, the Court in Grokster
made no effort to argue that
liable, the Supreme Court pronounced that Sony and Grokster
369, 398 (2006) ("[T]he doctrines of contributory infringement and inducement of infringement are stronger than ever, having been extended by the Supreme Court to cover copyright infringement through the use of VCR's and file sharing on the Internet."); Mark Bartholomew, Copyright, Trademark and Secondary Liability After Grokster
, 32 COLUM.
The high court ruled against file-sharing company Grokster
in 2005, but warnings that legal uncertainty would stifle future innovation don't seem to have stopped the march of technology into new and varied formats for listening to music and watching movies.
(17) The music industry pursued lawsuits against each of the new peer-to-peer services that popped up, including Kazaa, Morpheus, Grokster
, Aimster, LimeWire, and MegaUpload.
(43) Like in Grokster
, the defendants were aware that a large number of their users were engaged in the unlawful distribution of copyrighted material, (44) and the court found that the actions of the website aided and abetted the principal offences of copyright infringement under Swedish law.
The content industries filed infringement suits against companies such as Napster and Grokster
that enabled users to share files of copyrighted materials.