Journal of Intellectual Property Rights

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Contributory Copyright Infringement in Music Industry:Technological Implications


Affiliations
1 Symbiosis Law School, Symbiosis International (Deemed University), Viman Nagar, Pune, Maharashtra - 411 014, India
 

Disruptive technological changes in the ways of music consumption have led to evolution of new methods of piracy, exposing the global music industry to new challenges. One such mechanism is termed “Stream-ripping”. It is the illegitimate process of turning a streaming file on the internet into a downloadable one. Since the issue of stream ripping by software has not been determined by courts, the question of copyright infringement liability remains unanswered. The primary objective of this research paper is to critically analyze the law related to contributory copyright infringement facilitated by stream ripping software, and the implications it has on the global music industry. The paper attempts to achieve the aforementioned objective by comparing the legislative framework in the United States under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 1998 (DMCA) and the Indian legal framework under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 and the Information and Technology Act of 2000. The inference drawn is that the liability for contributory copyright infringement depends on the precise mechanism o f how the stream ripping technology involved works. If software rips and downloads copyrighted content itself, it shall be directly liable for copyright infringement. Mere facilitation of stream ripping will entail secondary liability for contributory infringement. The law related to contributory copyright infringement has significant implications for the music industry, as music is primarily consumed digitally and stringent regulatory measures would ensure that artists are fairly paid. It also has implications for the tech industry, as restrictive laws will hamper technological developments. Courts have not addressed the issue of contributory copyright infringement when it comes to online tools that facilitate the same, and this paper tries to elucidate this overlooked area.

Keywords

Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 1998, The Copyright Act, 1957, The Information and Technology Act, 2000, Copyright Treaty, Digital Rights Management, Technological Protection Measures, Audio Home Recording Act, 1992, Stream-Ripping Software, Fair Use, Substantial Non-Infringing Uses.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Knopper S, Appetite fo r self-destruction: The Spectacular Crash o f the Record Industry in the Digital Age (Avalon Publishing Group Inc), 2009, 121-123.

  • Postigo H, The Digital Rights Movement: The Role o f Technology in Subverting Digital Copyright (MIT Press), 2012, 127.

  • Bourreau M, Gensollen M, Moreau F & Waelbroeck P, "Selling less of more?" The impact of digitization on record companies, Journal o f Cultural Economics 37 (3) (2013) 327-346.

  • Garon Jon M, The heart o f the deal: Intellectual property aspects in the law and business o f entertainment, Journal o f Intellectual Property Rights, 17 (5) (2012) 443-453.

  • Mokyr J, The intellectual origins of modern economic growth, The Journal o f Economic History, 65 (2) (2005) 285-351.

  • Passman Donald S, All You Need to Know about the Music Business (Simon & Schuster), 2015.

  • www.iprs.org (accessed on 16 December 2018).

  • Morris J, Selling Digital Music, Formatting Culture (University of California Press, Oakland) 2015, 30-47.

  • Sony Corp. o f America v Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984).

  • Mark R L, The VCR Age: Home Video and Mass Communication (SAGE Publications Inc), 1989, 23-28.

  • Ramos C, The Betamax case: Accommodating public access and economic incentive in Copyright Law, Stanford Law Review, 31 (2) (1979) 243-263.

  • Gordon W, Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis o f the "Betamax" Case and Its Predecessors, Columbia Law Review, 82 (8) (1982) 1600-1657.

  • Ginsburg J, The Author's Place in the Future of Copyright, Proceedings o f the American Philosophical Society, 153 (2) (2009) 147-159.

  • MGMStudios, Inc. v GroksterLtd. 545 U.S. 913 (2005).

  • Hancock G, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v Grokster, Ltd.: Inducing Infringement and Secondary Copyright Liability, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 21(1) (2006) 189-212.

  • Singer J, Justice Breyer, "Grokster", and the Four Chords Song, Harvard Law Review, 128 (1) (2014) 483-487.

  • Copyright Law: Ninth Circuit Holds That Computer FileSharing Software Vendors Are Not Liable for User's Copyright Infringement, MGM Studios, Inc. v Grokster Ltd., Harvard Law Review, 118 (5) (2005) 1761-1768.

  • Wu T, The Copyright Paradox, The Supreme Court Review, 2005 (1) 229-255.

  • www.riaa.com (accessed on 20 December 2018).

  • www.eff.org (accessed on 10 December 2018).

  • In re Aimster Copyright Litigation 334 F.3d 643 (7th Cir. 2003).

  • Sverker K Hogberg, The Search for Intent-Based Doctrines o f Secondary Liability in Copyright Law, Columbia Law Review, 106 (4) (2006) 909-958.

  • Barker D, Defining the Contours o f the Digital Millennium Copyright Act: The Growing Body o f Case Law Surrounding the DMCA, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 20 (1) (2005) 47-63.

  • Booth G, Copyright Law and the Changing Economic Value o f Popular Music in India, Ethnomusicology, 59 (2) (2015) 262-287.

  • Ganley Paul, The internet, creativity and copyright incentives, Journal o f Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (3) (2005) 188-197.

  • MySpace Inc. v Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. 2011 (48) PTC 49 (Del).

  • Rajlakshmi V N, Copyright and copyculture in Indian music, Economic and Political Weekly, 40 (6) (2005) 516-517.

  • Avnish Bajaj v State 150 (2008) DLT 769.

  • Kahandawaarachchi T, Liability of internet service providers for third party online copyright infringement: A study of the US and Indian laws, Journal o f Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (6) (2007) 553-561.

  • A&MRecords, Inc. v Napster 239 F.3d 1004, (9th Cir. 2001).

  • Sivakumar S & Lukose L, Copyright Amendment Act, 2012: A revisit, Journal o f the Indian Law Institute, 55 (2) (2013) 149-174.

  • Lee E, The ethics of innovation: P2P software developers and designing substantial noninfringing uses under the Sony Doctrine, Journal o f Business Ethics, 62 (2) (2005) 147-162.

  • A&M Records, Inc. v Napster 239 F.3d 1004, (9th Cir. 2001).

  • Stockment A, Internet radio: The case for a Technology Neutral Royalty Standard, Virginia Law Review, 95 (8) (2009) 21292179.

  • Nagpal M, Copyright protection through Digital Rights Management in India: A non-essential imposition, Journal o f Intellectual Property Rights, 22 (4) (2017) 224-237.

  • De Filippi P & Wright A, Blockchain and the Law: The Rule o f Code (Harvard University Press) 2018, 117.

  • www.dotblockchainmedia.com (accessed on 26 December 2018).

  • Allen B, Music Law in the Digital Age: Copyright Essentials fo r Today’s Music Business (Berklee Press), 2017, 49.

  • Nimmer M, Copyright liability for audio home recording: Dispelling the Betamax myth, Virginia Law Review, 68 (8) (1982) 1505-1534.

  • RIAA v Diamond Multimedia Systems Inc. 180 F.3d 1072, (9th Cir. 1999).

  • International Federation of the Phonographic Industry's Global Music Report, 2017.

  • Jha S & Jha S, An analysis of the Theory of Contributory Infringement, Journal o f Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (5) (2006) 318-325.


Abstract Views: 324

PDF Views: 159




  • Contributory Copyright Infringement in Music Industry:Technological Implications

Abstract Views: 324  |  PDF Views: 159

Authors

Yash Bagal
Symbiosis Law School, Symbiosis International (Deemed University), Viman Nagar, Pune, Maharashtra - 411 014, India

Abstract


Disruptive technological changes in the ways of music consumption have led to evolution of new methods of piracy, exposing the global music industry to new challenges. One such mechanism is termed “Stream-ripping”. It is the illegitimate process of turning a streaming file on the internet into a downloadable one. Since the issue of stream ripping by software has not been determined by courts, the question of copyright infringement liability remains unanswered. The primary objective of this research paper is to critically analyze the law related to contributory copyright infringement facilitated by stream ripping software, and the implications it has on the global music industry. The paper attempts to achieve the aforementioned objective by comparing the legislative framework in the United States under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 1998 (DMCA) and the Indian legal framework under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 and the Information and Technology Act of 2000. The inference drawn is that the liability for contributory copyright infringement depends on the precise mechanism o f how the stream ripping technology involved works. If software rips and downloads copyrighted content itself, it shall be directly liable for copyright infringement. Mere facilitation of stream ripping will entail secondary liability for contributory infringement. The law related to contributory copyright infringement has significant implications for the music industry, as music is primarily consumed digitally and stringent regulatory measures would ensure that artists are fairly paid. It also has implications for the tech industry, as restrictive laws will hamper technological developments. Courts have not addressed the issue of contributory copyright infringement when it comes to online tools that facilitate the same, and this paper tries to elucidate this overlooked area.

Keywords


Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 1998, The Copyright Act, 1957, The Information and Technology Act, 2000, Copyright Treaty, Digital Rights Management, Technological Protection Measures, Audio Home Recording Act, 1992, Stream-Ripping Software, Fair Use, Substantial Non-Infringing Uses.

References