International Journal of Law and Information Technology Advance Access originally published online on December 16, 2006
International Journal of Law and Information Technology 2007 15(3):275-298; doi:10.1093/ijlit/eal020
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The ongoing design duty in Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd v Sharman License Holdings Ltd – Casting the scope of copyright infringement even wider
* Jeffrey C J Lee, LL.B (Hons) (National University of Singapore), LLM (London)(Queen Mary & Westfield College)
| Abstract |
|---|
The Australian Federal Court case of Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd v Sharman License Holdings Ltd (Sharman)1 is the latest in a series of peer-to-peer (P2P) filesharing cases from various jurisdictions that has found the software distributor/technology provider liable for copyright infringement.2
Sharman followed a few months after the groundbreaking US Supreme Court case of MGM Studios v Grokster Ltd 3 (Grokster) that had acknowledged the Sony safe harbour for technology providers but also introduced an inducement of infringement doctrine to deal with reprehensible conduct of infringers.
While both cases involved similar technology and shared a number of similarities on the facts and legal principles4, a closer examination of Sharman shows that the net of copyright infringement in P2P filesharing is cast wider than that in Grokster.
The effect of Sharman is an increased burden on the technology provider and the potentially tremendous consequences on innovation due to the lack of a clear safe harbour as well as the widening of the design obligation.