In: Economics
1) discuss Contributory/secondary infringement for patents and copyrights provide example for each
Contributory copyright infringement is a way of imposing secondary liability for infringement of a copyright. It is a means by which a person may be held liable for copyright infringement even though he or she did not directly engage in the infringing activity.[1] In the United States, the Copyright Act does not itself impose liability for contributory infringement expressly. It is one of the two forms of secondary liability apart from 'vicarious liability'. Contributory infringement is understood to be a form of infringement in which a person is not directly violating a copyright but, induces or authorises another person to directly infringe the copyright. This doctrine is a development of general tort law and is an extension of the principle in tort law that in addition to the tortfeasor, anyone who contributed to the tort should also be held liable.
In the United States of America, the doctrine of contributory infringement is based on the 1911 case of Kalem v Harper Brothers. The ingredients of contributory infringement were laid down in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Gershwin Publishing Corp v Columbia Artists Management Inc. in which the court said that contributory infringement is said to happen when someone, with knowledge of the infringing activity, induces, causes, or materially contributes to the infringing conduct of another. This doctrine was developed in the context of the 1909 Copyright Act which did not have any reference to contributory infringement. But, the 1976 Act recognised the exclusive right of a copyright owner 'to do and to authorize' the rights attached to a copyright enumerated in the Act. The words 'to authorize' were meant to bring contributory infringements within the purview of the Act.But, still, the Act did not specify the requirements of such forms of infringement and left its application to the discretion of courts.
The case of Sony Corp v Universal City Studios Inc, commonly known as the Betamax case, gave the United States Supreme Court its first opportunity to comprehensively look into and interpret the rules regarding secondary liability and contributory infringement in context of the 1976 Copyright statute. The primary issue in this case was whether a VCR manufacturing company could be held liable for copyright infringements done by its customers. The court held that secondary liability for copyright infringements was not a foreign concept to US Copyright law and it was well enshrined in the copyright law of the United States.
Secondary copyright infringement is a legal theory that allows a person to be held liable for copyright infringement, even though they didn’t engage in the actual infringement activities themselves. It basically involves the defendant inducing, causing, or contributing to material copyright infringement activities. Secondary copyright infringement may carry with it some strict legal consequences. It is also call contributory infringement or secondary liability for copyright infringement.
For instance, if the defendant provided another party with access to copyrighted material, knowing that it would be used for the purpose of infringing that copyright, they might be held liable under law. Another example would be where the defendant induced another party to violate a copyright. In this case, the defendant can be held liable even though they didn’t physically execute the infringing activities.