he VTR, which later was referred to as the VCR. Universal was seeking restitution for copyright infringements brought on by consumers videotaping TV shows. The courts found that, "[t]he sale of the VTR's to the public does not constitute contributory infringement of the respondents' copyrights"(HRRC 1). This is the same type of lawsuit, record companies and artists, trying to litigate the company by which some people might use the product for copyright infringing. Another example would be, a college student scanning a printed copyrighted text to add to a website research project. Did the student break the law by scanning the information and posting it on their website? Sure, s/he did. However, would the author bring the scanner manufacture up on charges or the Student? The student would get the lawsuit in this case. The scanner was just the device used in the process of breaking the law. Did the scanner maker know that it would be possible to do such actions when they manufactured the product? Yes, but can they take responsibility for what the consumer will do with the technology? No, well how can the RIAA expect to win this lawsuit?The smartest thing the artists and recording companies can do is learn to harness this type of "piracy". Software companies have fought this from the inception of the floppy disk. Software piracy was so bad in the late eighties, companies had to develop shareware. Shareware was a free trial of the software that was distributed for the cost of a floppy disk, about a dollar a copy. Computer gamers could also download these from a Bulletin Board or FTP site in the early stages of the Internet. This would allow gamers to try the game before they went to the store and bought the full version. This sounds like a novel idea. Maybe the RIAA should take notice? Ultimately the majority of recording artists are not happy about this software. Their thinking dictates that if someone is downloading their songs for free, t...
