Just read a brief report on the MGM vs. Grokster decision. Now I’m a Brit, therefore I plead ignorance in these matters (and I can’t remember much from my university course in American law) – but if today’s announcement states “…the makers of a technology have to answer for what people do with it if they use it to break the law…” then how does this legal precedent affect Smith & Wesson and other gun manufacturers?
Surely their technology is used to enable people to break the law? Where’s the line?
The second part of this ruling (and the broadcast flag) is one one in a series of dumb decisions though. Although I can understand where the judges are coming from – personally I don’t think the some of the filesharing companies are complete angels…and from my breif scan of the decision, they do seem to recognise legitimate uses of filesharing.
However, I can’t help thinking that the long term ramifications of these types of ruling will simply create a vacuum of innovation in the US over this century.
Why? Well, in this globalised economy, why bother setting up in the litigious USA, when any part of the world will do? Look at Skype…hq in London, and Estonia. In fact, pretty sure the CEO, Niklas Zennstrom, isn’t able to visit the US because of hos previous venture Kazaa?
India, China, Russia, you name the country, will play host to the new tech companies of the 21st Century; the countries that support open innovation, or simply ignore US law…In fact, ignoring US law might become a seriously wealth creating prospect.