Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, Vol. 15, pp. 7-18, January 2010
12 Pages Posted: 4 Oct 2009 Last revised: 27 Oct 2012
Date Written: October 2, 2009
The Pirate Bay. Three simple words. Such strong reactions. Proponents point to a vibrant forum for distributing files. Critics lament the massive pirating of copyrighted works.
The Swedish district court recently found The Pirate Bay (TPB) guilty of making copyrighted works available. This article explores the consequences of this decision. It first explains the technology underlying TPB and provides an overview of the website. It then analyzes the court’s opinion. Next, it applies the opinion’s reasoning to the Google search engine and the activities at issue in MGM v. Grokster.
The article finds that Google would potentially be liable and Grokster would likely be liable under the analysis of the TPB opinion. It concludes that the court’s broad views of complicity could, if adopted, have powerful effects in future cases.
Keywords: The Pirate Bay, Google, Grokster, copyright, file-sharing, P2P, BitTorrent, secondary liability, piracy, infringement
JEL Classification: K10, K40, K42, O30, O33, O34
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Carrier, Michael A., The Pirate Bay, Grokster, and Google (October 2, 2009). Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, Vol. 15, pp. 7-18, January 2010. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1481854 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1481854
By Stacy Baird
By Sanna Wolk
By Paul Heald