It's high stakes time in the Hollywood vs Grokster case - the legal battle which could kill filesharing and, say observers, technological innovation everywhere. But if you were worried that the judges sitting on the hearing might not know enough about technology to realise the complexity of the case - New York Times says that even the "least technically minded of the justices" is taking on the subject with vigour.
Justice David H. Souter asked Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., the lawyer arguing for the Hollywood studios and the recording industry, to envision "a guy sitting in his garage inventing the iPod."
"I know perfectly well that I can buy a CD and put it on my iPod," Justice Souter said. "But I also know if I can get music without buying it, I'm going to do so." Since that possibility was so obvious, he continued: "How do we give the developer the confidence to go ahead? On your theory, why isn't a foregone conclusion from the outset that the iPod inventor is going to lose his shirt?"
That David Souter, the least technically minded of the justices, who still drafts his opinions by hand on a legal pad, could even invite a dialogue about iPods, much less suggest that he could be tempted to engage in illegal file sharing, was an indication of how this confrontation of powerful interests had engaged the court.
So what does this mean? The NYT is hedging its bets - "But by the end of the lively argument, any prediction about what the court will actually decide appeared perilous". And nobody else is ready to plump for one side or the other. It's a case of wait-and-see.
