antitrust and misuse issues raised by Napster.^1791 Such discovery was subsequently stayed as the
result of filing of bankruptcy by Napster in June of 2002. On August 9, 2002, Napster’s assets
were placed up for auction in the bankruptcy proceeding.^1792
(2) The Scour.com LawsuitAnother case challenged the legality of peer-to-peer file sharing through a service similar
to the Napster service. On July 20, 2000, several leading motion picture studios, record
companies, and music publishers filed a copyright infringement action in federal district court in
New York against Scour, Inc., operator of an online file sharing service known as the Scour
Exchange. Unlike the Napster service, which was limited to the exchange of music files in MP3
format, the Scour Exchange enabled the peer-to-peer exchange of both music and motion picture
files among the hard drives of Scour users. The Scour website featured a banner containing a
“Top Five” search list, identifying current hit motion picture titles and music recordings that had
been requested most frequently by Scour users.^1793
Like the Napster service, Scour’s website provided users with free copies of its
proprietary file sharing software, which users could use to connect to Scour’s servers and choose
which content files stored on their computer hard drives they wished to make available for other
Scour users to download. Scour then inventoried the files each user had so designated and
combined them in a database and directory that was made available on Scour’s servers to all
Scour users currently logged on. Users could search the directory and initiate downloads of
desired material from other users’ computers.^1794 Unlike Napster, however, Scour also made
available through a partnership with a third party a service that provided secure storage space for
files on a remote server. The service provided what Scour promoted as “free, secure, online
storage space for all the multimedia files that you find on Scour.” Through this service, Scour
users were able to upload their files onto this remote server for other Scour users to download,
regardless of whether the originating user was logged on to Scour’s servers.^1795 The plaintiffs
alleged that Scour was contributorily and vicariously liable for the infringing downloads of
copyrighted material by Scour’s users.^1796
The defense of the lawsuit proved too costly for Scour, and on October 13, 2000, Scour
filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.^1797 On Nov. 14, 2000, Scour announced that it would
(^1791) Id. at 1113.
(^1792) Scarlett Pruitt, “Napster Assets Go Up for Auction” (Aug. 12, 2002), available as of Aug. 12, 2002 at
http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/08/12/020812hnnapster.xml.
(^1793) Complaint, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. v. Scour, Inc., No. 00 Civ. 5385 (GBD) (S.D.N.Y., filed July 20,
2000) ¶¶ 1-2, available as of Dec. 16, 2000 at http://www.mpaa.org/press/scourcomplaint.htm.
(^1794) Id. ¶ 58.
(^1795) Id. ¶ 60.
(^1796) Id. ¶ 71.
(^1797) Jim Hu, “Scour Files for Bankruptcy Protection” (Oct. 13, 2000), available as of Dec. 16, 2000 at
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-3178822.html.