Skype to Be Whacked by Streamcast with RICO Lawsuit

Written By Reprise Media | March 27, 2006 | No Comments

skypr rico lawsuit.jpg

It’s a tactic usually reserved for the wiseguys of organized crime (or the RIAA), but now VoIP outfit Skype could feel RICO’s sting. Ars Technica links to post at VoIP Watch saying that Streamcast, makers of the once-popular Morpheus file-sharing software, is preparing a suit against Skype based on the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The complaint alleges that Skype’s internet telephony service runs on the same peer-to-peer technology once used in Morpheus – FastTrack. That’s where things get complicated.

Ars Technica compiles the brief, star-crossed history of FastTrack. Niklas Zennström and Janus Friis initially developed the P2P software for use in the file-sharing program Kazaa and other clients, including Streamcast’s Morpheus. In 2002, Morpheus was shut out of the FastTrack network for non-payment of licensing fees. Meanwhile, Kazaa had become the target of several lawsuits and had been sold to Sharman Networks, an amalgamation officially incorporated on the island of Vanuatu.

Zennström and Friis disassociated themselves from Kazaa and moved on to create Skype, unique among ‘net phone services because it uses P2P rather than server-client technology. The crux of Streamcast’s argument seems to be that they had the first right of refusal to buy FastTrack before the sale of Kazaa to Sharman, and therefore they should legally control the software now powering Skype’s phone calls. They’re asking the court to straighten out the FastTrack mess, and in the meantime for a temporary restraining order against Skype.

Whether there’s any merit to the charges remains to be seen. VoIP Watch’s Andy Abramson – who cautions that the suit he’s read may not be the “final court submitted” one – thinks the matter will probably be settled out of court. Thankfully for eBay, which bought Skype last fall for just over 2.5 million bucks, they’re not named in the suit. But with that sale the auction site may have inadvertently acquired a headache and some bad publicity – what will the shareholders think?

Leave a Reply