WASHINGTON - Internet file-sharing services will be held responsible if they intend for their customers to use software primarily to swap songs and movies illegally, the Supreme Court ruled Monday, rejecting warnings that the lawsuits will stunt growth of cool tech gadgets such as the next iPod.

The unanimous decision sends the case back to lower court, which had ruled in favor of file-sharing services Grokster Ltd. and StreamCast Networks Inc. on the grounds that the companies couldn't be sued. The justices said there was enough evidence of unlawful intent for the case to go to trial.

File-sharing services shouldn't get a free pass on bad behavior, justices said.

Read the rest at

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8375955/

----Snip-----

What a crock....Prpare for the nwe era of Stationers. If anyone find something more dtailed, please post, but this one looks really bad from the inovation side. I can't see how any upstart could possibly get a start in technology in this country given the entrance price that could be levied.

In a word...OUTRAGEOUS!

I don't get this. Gun manufacturers can't be sued for someone using their guns and killing people; pharmaceutical companies that put mercury into children's imunization shots can't be sued after the children die from or end up with permanent brain damage; but you can sue a company that did not make a product with the intent of killing or causing physical impairment? Our priorities in this country have gone to hell.

If this doesn't prove there's an anti-technology bigotry out there amongst the decision makers in our society, then what will?

Psst...Skippy, follow the money....follow the money....

It clearly shows that laws/court decisions will never catch up to technology as it continues to expand into new frontiers.

Ive posted at Zdnet.com, sometimes posting here is just preaching to the choir.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5764135.html?tag=nl.e589
Looks like RIAA rats post there also
But yeah, I get virus updates from ZDnet and most importantly I followed a link from there to discover Dmusic

WTF? What were the justices thinking?

What an unfortunate decision. It's only going to get worse for hollywood. The RIAA has screwed up big time. The more they try to hurt consumers and innocent people, the greater the backlash will be, and the more that their dreams of total domination will slip away.

Money? What's that?

Money is what makes the world go around. Greed rules. I wonder how much the RIAA and MPAA paid the justices to rule this way? We know they constantly lobby and pay Congress to get legislation passed they feel necessary, even if it's pathetically ridiculous. Greed makes the world go 'round. Constantly.

I wouldn't go so far as to imply that the Supremes were paid off. The money trail I refer to leads to Congress, where the laws are made.

I'm going to step in here, and hope no one takes offense.
Dialogues like these are helpful in various ways, as in providing information, clarifying, etc. Speaking for myself, I'm learning quite a bit already on these affiliated websites.

Yes, Congress makes the laws (and in actuality so does the President with his shadowy executive orders), but I'm sure you would agree that the buck for legislation really stops at the door of the Supreme Court. They have the ultimate privilege to render judicial decisions that effectively carry the force of law, as well as to declare an existing law to be unconstitutional (that's a powerful weapon).
Of course, Congresspersons are sometimes the focus of lobbying and special contributions which have tainted the reputation of lawmakers.

Substitute the word recipients for "focus."

CodeWarrior:
"The Supreme Court is not THE law of the land...the Constitution is.
They are just men and women INTERPRETING (albeiting imperfectly, and I assert, occasionally incorrectly) the Law of the Land."

Until there is a subsequent Supreme decision that makes an about-face over an issue already interpreted by the high court, its rulings count as the force of law, don't they?
If that's the case, then the law of the land consists of the Constitution + the entire history of the latest Supreme Court rulings that have resulted from their purview...