Es ist ein Pyrrhus Sieg der Musikindustrie, da auch dieser Sieg keine große Auswirkung auf den Peer-to-Peer Tausch von Musik haben wird.
(...) New York Times:
Closing Grokster will have almost no effect on the swelling number of people - more than nine million - who use peer-to-peer networks. The recording industry thinks of file-sharing as a simple matter of theft that explains the declining sales of music CD's. But there's a lot more wrong with the industry than that, and the fight over file-sharing will find a surer resolution in the marketplace, broadly defined, than in Congress or the courts.
We are witnessing a collision between huge increases in the power to move information, and an equally enormous surge in the effort to lock it up. The Internet threatens the legal constraints that govern that fight. The natural reaction is to try to tighten those constraints by suing violators, writing new laws or creating new copy-protection systems. That's not the hard part. The hard part is finding a new, appropriate balance between innovation and the rights of intellectual property holders.
Und an wen zahlt denn Grokster nun die 50 Millionen eigentlich? Sachdienliche Hinweise erwünscht.........