Spy v Spy

Not really. MPAA v Torrentspy. Via infoworld:

In its filing Monday seeking to dismiss the case, Torrentspy argued that the MPAA might as well have sued Google, since Google does what Torrentspy does, only better. Torrentspy is a search engine that helps visitors find torrent files, which are often music or movie files stored in an easily shared file format.

"There is nothing alleged to distinguish defendants' website from that maintained by Google," Torrentspy said in its filing. "Everything alleged about defendants' website is true about Google, and even more so, because Google outperforms the allegations in the complaint," the filing reads.

Copyright

Another Keyword Trademark Dispute Makes It Past Summary Judgment

via CNET:

A court has ruled that a lawsuit over a company purchasing a rival's trademark as a search keyword should go to trial, in what could be the first case to scrutinize the trademark infringement liability of keyword purchasers.

Edina Realty sued rival real estate company TheMLSonline.com, accusing it of false advertising, trademark infringement and trademark dilution. According to the suit, MLS used "Edina Realty" in search terms purchased on Google and Yahoo, in the text of the MLS ads that appeared on the two search sites, and in hidden links and text on the MLS Web site.

* * *

A ruling issued last week by the U.S. District Court in Minnesota said evidence of actual trademark dilution had not been provided in the case but that the case could go to trial because there were disputes on material facts with regard to whether the use of the trademark was causing confusion among consumers.

Trademark

Swedish Pirate Bay Thrives As BitTorrent Sites Are Targeted

Via wired.com:

According to "Anakata," one of the site's operators, subsequent MPAA lawsuits have continued to drive more users to The Pirate Bay, which today boasts 1 million unique visitors a day. The Pirate Bay's legal adviser, law student Mikael Viborg, said the site receives 1,000 to 2,000 HTTP requests per second on each of its four servers.

That's bad news for the content industries, which have fired off letter after menacing letter to the site, only to see their threats posted on The Pirate Bay, together with mocking replies. Viborg said that no one has successfully indicted The Pirate Bay or sued its operators in Swedish courts. Attorneys for DreamWorks and Warner Bros., two companies among those that have issued take-down demands to the site, did not return calls for comment.

Viborg credits The Pirate Bay's seeming immunity to the basic structure of the BitTorrent protocol. The site's Stockholm-based servers provide only torrent files, which by themselves contain no copyright data -- merely pointers to sources of the content. That makes The Pirate Bay's activities perfectly legal under Swedish statutory and case law, Viborg claims. "Until the law is changed so that it is clear that the trackers are illegal, or until the Swedish Supreme Court rules that current Swedish copyright law actually outlaws trackers, we'll continue our activities. Relentlessly," wrote Viborg in an e-mail.

P2P

The GPL and Sarbanes-Oxley

The Software Freedom Law Center just published a white paper dismissing accusations (particularly from Wasabi Systems) that distributers of open source code licensed under the GPL are at greater risk of violating the corporate compliance provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act:

Some have recently argued that corporate executives face increased risk of criminal liability under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) if their companies develop and distribute code licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL). The argument, as it has been made, raises significant concerns about SOX compliance, but it fails to clarify the scope and context of these points. We have reviewed these issues and, as discussed more fully below, there is in fact no special risk for developing GPL'd code under SOX. Under most circumstances, the risk posed to a company by SOX is not affected by whether they use GPL'd or any other type of software. Arguments to the contrary are pure anti-GPL FUD.

Open Source