Decision: A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.

In the stated supreme court case, Napster was dropped of the charges claiming of the infringement towards the safe harbor provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Napster also does not relate directly to any form of financial obligation or liability to trade that is going on. “Even if there is direct copyright infringement, the elements of contributory copyright infringement & vicarious liability have not been shown.”In fact making some sort of profit for the items being traded would constitute infringement. Napster, Inc., did not make any. Napster was not in direct control of the trading going on between its users, thus the charges were dropped on Napster and focus was brought forth to Napster’s Users. “Napster users are not direct copyright infringers, because they are either covered by the immunity granted by the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA) and/or their use is a fair use.” Despite the dropped charges, Napster was forced to stop their services to their users, concluded by Chief Judge, Marilyn Hall Patel, "For the foregoing reasons, the court GRANTS plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction against Napster, Inc. Defendant is hereby preliminarily ENJOINED from engaging in, or facilitating others in copying, downloading, uploading, transmitting, or distributing plaintiffs' copyrighted musical compositions and sound recordings, protected by either federal or state law, without express permission of the rights owner."