Welcome to Volume 8, Issue 2 of the Journal. In this issue, the authors
address three very diverse topics of national and international significance:
the liability of internet service providers for copyright infringement, the
taxation of e-commerce, and the applicability of the fair use doctrine to instant
messaging software. Each of these topics deals with issues that can, and ultimately
will, have widespread effects on the use and growth of the Internet.
In the main article, Internet Service Provider's Liability for Copyright
Infringement- How to Clear the Misty Indian Perspective, advocate V.K.
Unni, an Indian trademark attorney, addresses the inadequacy of India's new
Information Technology Act in dealing with the liability of internet service
providers for copyright infringement by their customers. In his analysis, Mr.
Unni discusses the methods employed by other industrialized nations including
the United States, Australia, Canada, and Singapore to suggest how India should
address this important problem.
In the first comment, The Taxation of E-Commerce: The Inapplicability of
Physical Presence Necessitates an Economic Presence Standard, Kathleen
P. Lundy, a recent graduate of Notre Dame Law School, considers the problem
of state taxation of e-commerce from a constitutional perspective. Ms. Lundy
points out that the states are losing millions of dollars in sales and use taxes
annually and that there is currently no means to rectify this situation. As
a solution, Ms. Lundy suggests that, instead of a physical presence requirement
for businesses to come under the power of state taxation, an economic presence
standard should be instituted to allow the states more flexibility in taxing
e-business. Ms. Lundy's piece provides an in-depth constitutional analysis and
poses a thoughtful and thought-provoking solution to a long-standing taxation
problem.
Finally, in the second comment, Is the Whole Greater than the Sum of Its
Parts? The Applicability of the Fair Use Doctrine to the New Breed of Instant
Messaging Software, Haydn J. Richards Jr. rounds out our discussion of
the file-sharing problem that caught the attention of the nation in the recent
Napster decision by addressing the applicability of the fair use doctrine to
Aimster, which merges instant-messaging and file sharing. Mr. Richards distinguishes
Aimster from Napster claiming it has fair uses that are not related to file
sharing. Mr. Richards reaches the conclusion that Aimster falls under the fair
use doctrine, and will likely be viewed by the courts as having a legitimate
fair use.
The Editorial Board and staff of the Journal would like to thank you
for your interest in the Richmond Journal of Law & Technology.
We hope that you enjoy this issue and that you will continue to visit the Journal
to keep abreast of the cutting edge issues in the area of law and technology.
Paul A. Fritzinger
Editor-in-Chief
Monday, November 19, 2001