NewsBlog 5000
The finger on the invisible hand

Supreme Court Justice Admits to Stealing Music

Thursday, March 31, 2005

The Supreme Court today heard arguments both for and against the legality of the music sharing software Grokster. Grokster attorneys contend that Grokster is a legal communications tool that allows file sharing. The recording industry argues that peer to peer software like Grokster is costing them billions of dollars.

Grokster attorneys contend that Grokster is a legal communications tool.

This has been a hard case on Justices who are afraid that a wrong decision may adversely affect the home recording and photocopying industries. There is even concern that the next generation of devices like the iPod will be killed if their decision comes down too strongly in favor of the Recording Industry.

But during the discussion on whether making Grokster illegal would also make the iPod illegal, Justice Souter surprised everyone. In almost unheard of fashion for the Supreme Court, Souter displayed a thread of reason and a reasonable grasp on reality. Souter suggested that the recording industry was creating a double standard by letting the iPod survive. Entertainment industry lawyer, Donald Verrilli Jr., maintained that most iPod buyers are honest consumers who pay for their digital music.

Donald Verrilli Jr., maintained that most iPod buyers are honest consumers

This is when Souter dropped the bombshell. "I know perfectly well if I can get music on my iPod without paying that's what I'm going to do," said Souter. Supreme Court Justice David Hackett Souter admitted that he would steal music rather than pay for it to fill his iPod, and he makes over $200,000 a year.

Souter, an H.W. Bush appointee, has always been a pariah in the Supreme Court. The events of this case closely mimic last year’s Lawrence vs. Texas, when Souter admitted to committing sodomy in Texas “any time [he] got a chance”. And in his dissent to Bigelow v. M&Ms, Justice Souter said that the ruling violated the equal protection clause "as not all Americans have access to cats and water”!!!

Thanks for the update!! I posted a few articles on this stuff yesterday...most people don't seem to be aware of what is going on.

Are we just going to wake up one day and find out that all file sharing software is illegal?
How can anyone not see that file sharing is just as evil as sodomy? Justice Souter is way off base here. No matter what we want to be right, sodomy is just as evil as file sharing!

So you file sharing sodomites beware! Your's is the ass that will be paying the price!!!!
Who DOESN'T commit sodomy as often as possible when in Texas? Jeez.

I'm proud to say I've never downloaded a single song/file off of the "Internet Superhighway" that wasn't purchased legally. It's just an anal ethical thing I do. Either that or I'm just technologically retarded.
Congratulations Linds.

You are more ethical than the current SCOTUS. You have my support when Rehnquist goes tits up.
Thanks for the 'shocking' file sharing/sodomy update!

When you think about it, there's a too-real connection between the two subjects . . . from the point of view of the software/song/etc. creator.
On a serious note, it's encouraging that Souter sees the hypocrisy of banning the tool rather than illegal use of the tool.

(No, not that tool, get your mind out of the gutter.)
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link