huge news Justene, thanks, any thoughts on the legal side of it? How much does this violate Betamax? How much of a change is it to say they can look to the marketing and promotion to determine intent?

Does the ruling by the US Supreme Court mean that now people can sue companies that make products when someone misuses them? Are they like Gorkster also responsible? Also in making these companies responsible in how the customer uses that product? Or a company that makes material for explosives can they be held accountable when a terrorist uses it? Can we sue the movie makers, the distributors, and the marketers when someone goes out and kills several people because the game, the movie or the book influenced them to do what they did. Or did they also make this decision because the movie makers are in the same group that stopped a recount vote from being recounted? Just a couple of questions. Can't sue someone for asking question. Can you?

Your comment on suing game/movie makers is invalid in this case because Grokster (allegedly) is the tool used to commit the crime. The movies and games are alleged to be influences, but not the actual tools of the crime, in your example, murder.

lol Note taken

Well maybe then with this ruling we can sue the car manufactures, weapon makers and so on. Man oh man this could open a big can of nasty worms

I thought we could already sue car makers? REM the Bridgestone screw-up?

Not suing a car Maker for someone using that car in a crime lol

Ah... gotcha