United States v. Slater
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
348 F.3d 666 (2003)

- Written by Kelli Lanski, JD
Facts
Jason Slater and Christian Morley (defendants) were members of an organization called Pirates with Attitudes (PWA), which was created to disseminate copyrighted software over the internet, without permission. PWA’s members paid no money to download available software from the group. Instead, PWA set up a bartering system whereby each member contributed services in a chain of activities implemented to supply the copyrighted programs to PWA. First, members would supply the original software, after which different members would crack the software code to eliminate any protections. After that, other members would test the newly cracked software, and a final group of PWA members uploaded the software to PWA’s sites for download. One PWA site was called Sentinel. After an investigation, the Federal Bureau of Investigation seized the computer on which Sentinel was stored and identified tens of thousands of computer programs available for download by PWA members. Slater and Morley were indicted for conspiracy to commit copyright infringement. Slater pled guilty, and Morley was convicted. They both appealed. Morley disputed the trial court’s decision to deny his requested jury instruction on fair use.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wood, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

