Law 619 | Electronic Commerce

T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F P E N N S Y L V A N I A L A W S C H O O L

E L E C T R O N I C C O M M E R C E : V E R S I O N 2.0

MAIN MENU:	CALENDAR	SYLLABUS	DISCUSSION	ADMINISTRATION
NOTICES:	Congratulations to the Fall 2001 class for an excellent semester. eCommerce will return next year.

1. The Scope of Fair Use Online

2. Technology v Law

3. (Some) Implications of Napster

Overview of Napster

Fair Use & Napster
. . . or, How is Napster different from Betamax (Sony)

The Napster Fair Use Defense

Type of Use	Fair Use Factor				Result
Type of Use	purpose and character of use	nature of the work	amount of work used	effect on the market	Result
Sampling
Space-Shifting

Technology vs Law

Consider again: How is the Napster decision different from Sony?

One Possibility: Napster users lack fair use, while Betamax users had fair use.

(Yet doesn't Napster have significant noninfringing uses? What are they?)

Better Answer: The Indirect Liability of Napster

(When is the seller / developer / manufacturer / offerror liable for infringement done with the good or service?)

Indirect Liability, type I: Contributory Infringement

Knowledge

What is required for "knowledge" in the online context? Is this different than Sony?

Material contribution

How did Napster "materially contribute"?

Indirect Liability, type II: Vicarious Infringement

Financial Benefit

What was the "direct" financial benefit to Napster from the file copying?

Supervision

What should Napster have done to alter this prong of the test?

How is Napster about technology?

Does the 9th Circuit make the right decision?

The Napster Injunction

What did the 9th Circuit say about the scope of the injunction?

Where do the burdens lie? (What are the implications of this?)

Must Napster ensure that that its filters are 100% effective? (Or, if not, what percentage?)

Napster Implications

Consider:

The Nature of a Record Company.

The "Real" RIAA Target.

The Coming Battle for Downloads.