Skip to main content
Article
Kazaa goes the way of Grokster? Authorisation of copyright infringement via peer-to-peer networks in Australia
Australian Intellectual Property Journal (2006)
  • Rebecca Giblin, Monash University
  • Mark Davison, Monash University
Abstract

In Universal Music Australia v Sharman License Holdings (2005) 65 IPR 289 an Australian Federal Court suggested for the first time that it is acceptable to prohibit the continued distribution of a product on the grounds that after its sale it is capable of being used by its purchaser to infringe copyright, even though it may also have non-infringing uses. The decision, currently on appeal to the Full Court, raises important questions about the scope and meaning of the concept of “authorisation” under Australian law. The most important question is whether or not some degree or control is necessary to support a finding of authorisation. This article comprehensively explains the decision and argues that the Full Court could usefully draw upon some aspects of the United States approach to answer the questions raised.

Keywords
  • P2P,
  • peer-to-peer,
  • file sharing,
  • file-sharing,
  • kazaa,
  • sharman,
  • grokster,
  • morpheus,
  • napster,
  • aimster,
  • copyright,
  • secondary infringement,
  • secondary liability,
  • vicarious infringement,
  • vicarious liability,
  • contributory infringement,
  • contributory liability,
  • sony,
  • betamax
Disciplines
Publication Date
2006
Citation Information
Rebecca Giblin and Mark Davison. "Kazaa goes the way of Grokster? Authorisation of copyright infringement via peer-to-peer networks in Australia" Australian Intellectual Property Journal Vol. 17 Iss. 1 (2006)
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/giblin/3/