That Was the Weeks That Was

OK, I AM a heavily-laden junior faculty member. Perhaps daily blogging was a little overly ambitious, especially at the end of a semester. BUT . . . here's what happened while I was away grading papers . . . in headline form . . .

Court Says Verizon Must Reveal Song Swappers

and . . .

Judge Tosses Suit Against Grokster, StreamCast

so, for those of you keeping score at home, here is the current state of the law in Federal districts that have ruled in peer-to-peer cases.

In Northern California, p2p is presumably illegal, per Judge Patel's ruling that shut down Napster.

In "Middle" California (i.e. L.A. and environs) p2p is presumably legal, per the Grokster case.

But in D.C., p2p is, once again, presumably illegal, per the Verizon case. In fact, it's presumably so illegal that an ISP can be forced to divulge the names of individuals suspected of having violated copyrights. I reiterate, it is currently impossible to differentiate between legal and illegal downloads at the ISP level. The question that must be asked is whether the ultimate uses of the downloaded material constitute inappropriate infringements. The downloading itself must not be understood as, in and of itself, an illegal act.

This is a befuddling circumstance. One might well wonder whether it is in citizens' interests to keep petitioning the courts on these matters. While we're waiting for the dicta to clear, most of us should probably rush off to Creative Commons to opt out of a copyright system that the courts seem unable to properly adjudicate.