Abstract
This essay explores the controversy over peer-to-peer (p2p) software, examining the legal and ethical dimensions of allowing software companies to develop p2p technologies. It argues that, under the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Sony betamax case, technology developers must be accorded the freedom to innovate and develop technologies that are capable of substantial noninfringing uses. This doctrine, known as the Sony doctrine, provides an important safe harbor for technological development, including p2p. The safe harbor, however, does not immunize conduct beyond the design, sale, or supply of the product. For other conduct that falls outside the Sony safe harbor, the traditional standards of secondary liability apply.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Apple: 2004, ‘The iTunes Music Store Countdown to a 100 Million Songs’, http://www.apple.com/itunes/100million/.
Associated Press, ‘Apple’s iTunes Sells 250 Million Songs’, Jan. 24, 2005.
Barnes, K.: 2004, ‘2004: A Happy-News Year for Music Industry,’ USA Today, Jan. 6, 2005, D1.
D. Chisum (2004) On Patents § 17.03[3] Mathew Bender & Co. Newark
C. Christensen (1997) The Innovator’s Dilemma Harvard Business School Press Cambridge, MA 143–158
Easley, R. F.: 2004, ‘Ethical Issues in Industry Response to Innovation: The Case of the Music Industry’ (working paper).
F. Easterbrook (1999) ArticleTitleCyberspace Versus Property Law? Texas Review of Law & Policy 4 103–113
M. Fagin F. Pasquale K. Weatherall (2002) ArticleTitleBeyond Napster: Using Antitrust Law to Advance and Enhance Online Music Distribution Boston University Journal of Science and Technology Law 8 451–573
W. Fisher (2004) Promises to Keep: Technology, Law, and the Future of Entertainment Stanford University Press Stanford, CA
W. Gordon (1984) ArticleTitleFair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the Betamax Case and Its Predecessors Columbia Law Review 82 1600–1657
Hatch, O.: 2004, News Release, ‘Hatch Introduces Bill to Stop Inducement of Children to Commit Crimes’, June 22, 2004.
Heine, P.: 2004, ‘Infinity Exec Exits Amid Controversy’, Reuters, Nov. 27, 2004 (online).
O. W. Holmes (1897) ArticleTitleThe Path of the Law Harvard Law Review 10 457–478
L. M. Ivey (2003–2004) ArticleTitleLosing the Battles, Winning the War: Public Nuisance as a Theory of Gun Manufacturer Liability in Tort Cumberland Law Review 34 231–251
Jardin, X.: 2004, ‘Music Is Not a Loaf of Bread’, Wired, Nov. 15, 2004 (online).
P. N. Katz R. R. Riddle (2004) ArticleTitleDesigning Around a United States Patent South Texas Law Review 45 647–684
Keaten, J.: 2005, ‘Music Industry Upbeat Over Online Sales’, Associated Press, Jan. 22, 2005.
W. Landes R. Posner (2003) The Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Law Harvard University Press Cambridge, CA 10
J. Lardner (1987) Fast Forward: A Machine and the Commotion It Caused W.W. Norton & Co. New York 26–30
M. Lemley R. A. Reese (2004) ArticleTitleReducing Digital Copyright Infringement Without Restricting Innovation Stanford Law Review 56 1345–1434
D. Lichtman W. Landes (2003) ArticleTitleIndirect Liability for Copyright Infringement: An Economic Perspective Harvard Journal on Law and Technology 16 395–410
J. Litman (2001) Digital Copyright: Protecting Intellectual Property on the Internet Prometheus Books Amherst, N.Y. 106–107
D. McGowan (2004) ArticleTitleCopyright Nonconsequentialism Missouri Law Review 69 1–72
‘Music’s Brighter Future’, The Economist, Oct. 28, 2004, pp. 71–73.
R. R. Nelson S. G. Winter (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA 128–129
N. W. Netanel (2003) ArticleTitleImpose a Noncommercial Use Levy to Allow Free Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Harvard Journal of Law & Technology 17 1–84
Oberholzer-Gee, F. and Strumpf, K.: 2004, ‘The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales: An Empirical Analysis’, pp. 1–51.
R. C. Picker (2003) ArticleTitleFrom Edison to the Broadcast Flag: Mechanisms of Consent and Refusal and the Propertization of Copyright University of Chicago Law Review 70 281–296 Occurrence Handle10.2307/1600559
G. Rich (1953) ArticleTitleInfringement Under Section 271 of the Patent Act of 1952 George Washington Law Review 21 521–546
C. Sunstein (1994) ArticleTitleIncommensurability and Valuation in the Law Michigan Law Review 92 779–861
G. Szott Moohr (2004) ArticleTitleThe Crime of Copyright Infringement: An Inquiry Based on Morality, Harm, and Criminal Theory Boston University Law Review 83 731–782
J. Tehranian (2003) ArticleTitleAll Rights Reserved? Reassessing Copyright and Patent Enforcement in the Digital Age University of Cincinnati Law Review 72 45–94
T. Wu (2003) ArticleTitleWhen Code Isn’t Law Virginia Law Review 89 679–751
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lee, E. The Ethics of Innovation: p2p Software Developers and Designing Substantial Noninfringing Uses Under the Sony Doctrine. J Bus Ethics 62, 147–162 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-0186-4
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-0186-4