The cases raise fundamental questions about how provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) are applied. isoHunt and Disney Enterprises Inc., et al. The article also highlights the Firm’s work in Viacom International Inc. Smith, who argued the case before the Court, is quoted in the article, saying he felt as though he were on the “front lines of the digital war,” and noting that the case and others like it would help to write the basic foundation of laws in the future. In that case, Firm attorneys representing the Entertainment Merchants Association convinced the United States Supreme Court to strike down a California law restricting the sale or rental of violent video games to minors, which they argued ran afoul of the First Amendment’s freedom of speech and expression provision. Noting that “attorneys at Jenner & Block were involved in some of the biggest cases that promised to revolutionize the media and entertainment industry this past year,” the online publication profiled the Practice in a lengthy feature highlighting its noteworthy work in a number of highly significant cases such as the Supreme Court victory in Brown v. I'm very open to ideas, and it's great there's a lot of discussion here (and better late than never, OP links to our pleading from 2 months ago =b) This is our original pleading to the Canadian court: īack on (re)building business models of discovering and sharing music/films/what have you, I have ideas myself, but remember the central issue of identification, metadata on what a file is.Jenner & Block’s Content, Media & Entertainment Practice has been named a Law360 “Media & Entertainment Group of the Year” for 2011. As we've already seen with SOPA and other attempts at censorship, copyright when taken to the extreme is at odds with the Internet and expression.īack on (re)building business models of discovering and sharing music/films/what have you, I have ideas myself, but remember the central issue of identification, metadata on what a file is. It's about the founding principle of the Internet itself: to network peers to peers, to communicate, to share across the globe, quick, cheap and unimpeded. Freedom of expression is a constitutional issue and is more important than mere infringements. The bigger issue as we've pleaded to the Canadian court is that this is not just about copyright. We index and search any and all files being shared on BitTorrent, or any network on the Internet. Other than that, we can't control what users of our search engine want from what others share on the larger BitTorrent ecosystem nor do we try to. On legal content, we index Creative Commons, Open Source, and otherwise files that are indeed intended to be shared online. And don't compare us with The Pirate Bay either, how we handle wishes and notices of copyright holders is opposite of their antics like this back in the day: Hundreds if not thousands of copyright holders have notified us for take downs and we've complied with all, and some explicitly praised us for our speed (usually within the same or next day). We have a fully electronic DMCA notice and take down system ( ), for years when Google was still requiring snail mail for take downs I might add. Those that do care and are loud, like Hollywood and the Canadian music industry that are suing us (which doesn't include all, if not most, of actual Canadian artists mind you but I digress), are a minority among all the people on earth who "creates".Īnd to others arguing that isoHunt can't be compared to Google or Youtube, I beg to differ. And I reckon that similar to issue with orphaned works, which there is plenty of, that category of "don't care" is a very large category. The problem with copyright on the internet is that sharing is too easy, and there's no Big Database to know what file's copyright belongs to who and what's to do with it (take down, monetize, don't care). on sharing activityĪll the lawsuits involving copyright, including ours, could be solved if identification of files is a known quantity.
![youtube isohunt youtube isohunt](https://theqna.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/IsoHunt-–-Proxy-Unblocked.jpg)
So, we are 3 layers away from that, in order to: And with knowing who, to know the wishes of the copyright holder on internet distribution. And with knowing what a file is, to know who that file's copyright belong to. Semantic identification of what a file on BitTorrent is beyond keywords (which is all we can do as a search engine), to know for certain that a file is Matrix the movie, or Matrix the math lecture. I can't condense our legal and business issues into a single point better than this: the problem is identification.