data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6a787/6a787b7aea7e55af305a21df55e141aaea059936" alt=""
The amicus brief outlines its argument for upholding the district court's decision by the premise that the generalized knowledge of infringement by third parties is not sufficient to trigger liability for contributory infringement. The brief rightfully argues that prevailing precedent has held that specific knowledge of infringement is required. The generalized knowledge of infringement as Tiffany would like the appellate court to hold would also place an undue burden on EBay. It would also make the whole development of sales of used goods on the internet obsolete.
This is an interesting turn of events. As posted earlier, IACC had submitted an amicus brief in favor of Tiffany's arguments. I read the amicus brief put forth by Amazon, Google and some others. It is very compelling because if the appellate court reverses the district court decision, it will affect internet commerce in a very scary way. It places a lot more responsibility on the shoulders of internet commerce providers such as EBay and Amazon to regulate the activities of sellers in a way that would be logically impossible given the current model. The internet commerce model would collapse and leave a host of dead internet giants in its wake. No wonder Google and Amazon submitted this brief. I will keep you posted about the upcoming details surrounding this case. It could change internet commerce as we know it.
No comments:
Post a Comment