Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review Volume 25 Number 3 Article 2 6-1-2005 Control Content, Not Innovation: Why Hollywood Should Ebrace Peer-to-Peer Technology Despite the MGM v. Grokster Battle Timothy K. Andrews Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Timothy K. Andrews, Control Content, Not Innovation: Why Hollywood Should Ebrace Peer-to-Peer Technology Despite the MGM v. Grokster Battle, 25 Loy. L.A. Ent. L. Rev. 383 (2005). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr/vol25/iss3/2 This Notes and Comments is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. CONTROL CONTENT, NOT INNOVATION: WHY HOLLYWOOD SHOULD EMBRACE PEER- TO-PEER TECHNOLOGY DESPITE THE MGM V. GROKSTER BATTLE Written December 2, 2004* I. INTRODUCTION Despite Napster's legal defeat in 20011 and thousands of lawsuits against individual file sharers,2 peer-to-peer ("P2P") file sharing has continued to flourish. Estimates of the economic impact of illegal file sharing on music album sales vary considerably. The recording industry largely blames P2P file sharing for the drop in revenue from sales of CDs from $13.2 billion in 2001 to $11.2 billion in 2003. 5 However, a recent * This Comment was written prior to the decision of the United States Supreme Court handed down on June 27, 2005.