Inducement rule
Encyclopedia
The inducement rule is a test a United States
court
can use to determine whether liability
for copyright infringement
committed by third parties could be assigned to the distributor of the device used to commit infringement.
and peer-to-peer
file-sharing Supreme Court
case.
The inducement rule holds 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." Justice Souter elaborated on the details of the test by illustrating its application to Grokster. He noted that liability could not be assigned through "mere knowledge of infringing potential or of actual infringing uses"; further, actions incident to the distribution of the product such as technical support would not "support liability in themselves." Instead, "the inducement rule ... premises liability on purposeful, culpable expression and conduct." In the case of Grokster, the Court found such "purposeful, culpable expression and conduct" by noting that the two file-sharing software companies actively sought former Napster users and attempted to establish themselves as the alternative to Napster once it became clear that it would cease to exist through judicial action; the companies further refused to build filtering mechanisms into its software to reduce the infringing use of it by their users; finally, the Court had found a correlation between the infringing use of the software and the companies’ profit.
and Fred von Lohmann
charged that the inducement rule has created a great deal of uncertainty around technological innovation, and suggested that this uncertainty will create a "chilling effect" on future technological development.
United States
The United States of America is a federal constitutional republic comprising fifty states and a federal district...
court
Court
A court is a form of tribunal, often a governmental institution, with the authority to adjudicate legal disputes between parties and carry out the administration of justice in civil, criminal, and administrative matters in accordance with the rule of law...
can use to determine whether liability
Legal liability
Legal liability is the legal bound obligation to pay debts.* In law a person is said to be legally liable when they are financially and legally responsible for something. Legal liability concerns both civil law and criminal law. See Strict liability. Under English law, with the passing of the Theft...
for copyright infringement
Copyright infringement
Copyright infringement is the unauthorized or prohibited use of works under copyright, infringing the copyright holder's exclusive rights, such as the right to reproduce or perform the copyrighted work, or to make derivative works.- "Piracy" :...
committed by third parties could be assigned to the distributor of the device used to commit infringement.
Summary of the rule
Originating from patent law, the inducement rule test was articulated in Justice Souter’s majority opinion in MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., a significant 2005 copyrightCopyright
Copyright is a legal concept, enacted by most governments, giving the creator of an original work exclusive rights to it, usually for a limited time...
and peer-to-peer
Peer-to-peer
Peer-to-peer computing or networking is a distributed application architecture that partitions tasks or workloads among peers. Peers are equally privileged, equipotent participants in the application...
file-sharing Supreme Court
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
case.
The inducement rule holds 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." Justice Souter elaborated on the details of the test by illustrating its application to Grokster. He noted that liability could not be assigned through "mere knowledge of infringing potential or of actual infringing uses"; further, actions incident to the distribution of the product such as technical support would not "support liability in themselves." Instead, "the inducement rule ... premises liability on purposeful, culpable expression and conduct." In the case of Grokster, the Court found such "purposeful, culpable expression and conduct" by noting that the two file-sharing software companies actively sought former Napster users and attempted to establish themselves as the alternative to Napster once it became clear that it would cease to exist through judicial action; the companies further refused to build filtering mechanisms into its software to reduce the infringing use of it by their users; finally, the Court had found a correlation between the infringing use of the software and the companies’ profit.
Criticism
Since the decision was released, several intellectual property scholars, including Lawrence LessigLawrence Lessig
Lawrence "Larry" Lessig is an American academic and political activist. He is best known as a proponent of reduced legal restrictions on copyright, trademark, and radio frequency spectrum, particularly in technology applications, and he has called for state-based activism to promote substantive...
and Fred von Lohmann
Fred von Lohmann
Fred von Lohmann is an American lawyer practicing as a senior copyright counsel at Google.Before joining Google in July 2010, Fred was a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, specializing in intellectual property matters. In that role, he has represented programmers,...
charged that the inducement rule has created a great deal of uncertainty around technological innovation, and suggested that this uncertainty will create a "chilling effect" on future technological development.