By now, most cord-cutters are familiar with KODI technology and the add-ons that allow them to illegally access worldwide repositories of live and recorded content. Simply put, KODI is open source software that allows users to view and hear media files stored locally or on the internet. In and of itself, the possession of KODI software is not illegal. It is when the user installs add-ons, which allow the technology to access copyrighted live or recorded content, that the legality of its use becomes less clear.

Essentially, KODI add-ons are a loosely analogous version of turn of the century, peer-to-peer audio MP3 file sharing technology embodied by a company called Napster. In 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed a district court’s injunction against Napster, finding that the technology facilitated the widespread illegal sharing of proprietary content without the consent of the owners of the copyrighted material.

While the Napster case was demonstrative of how an apparently benign and legal technology can still be found illegal depending upon its implementation by the user, the conundrum of KODI is more difficult. Third-party developers, over whom the KODI community has no direct control, are creating add-ons that allow a user to use it illegally and access copyrighted content that is not controlled by or centrally stored by the KODI technology. To hold KODI legally responsible for the illegal implementation of its technology would be akin to holding Google, Microsoft or other browser and search engine companies liable for the implementation of their technology for an illegal purpose such as downloading or trafficking in child pornography. Or, in the brick-and-mortar world, holding the manufacturer of the fertilizer ammonium nitrate responsible for the mixing of its product with diesel fuel and other ingredients to create a bomb.

Finally, any attempt to impose a widespread restriction on the use of KODI technology would likely do more harm than good, cause a chilling effect on the rights of individuals and on freedom of expression. It would also most likely result in a slightly different, reengineered version of the technology appearing on the market before the ink on any law has dried.

Case in point: CameraFI and DU Recorder. What are they? CameraFI is a Korean Android application that allows a smartphone owner to take content being received or viewed live on their device and simultaneously record it or stream it globally on all major livestreaming applications such as Facebook Live and YouTube Live. DU Recorder is another android application created by Baidu, Inc., a major Chinese language search engine, that allows users to record and stream directly from their phones to livestreaming applications.

So what’s the big deal?

Think of a small packet of wildflower seeds. Inside of the pouch are seeds that, when spread into the soil, will create all sorts of vibrant flowers. KODI add-on content is just one species of seed. Other species are live sports, movies and other content legally acquired on a phone or tablet from one of the many over the top (OTT) services such as ESPN GO, Netflix, Amazon Video or MLB.tv. These are all blended and placed into the seed packet, or in this case the phone or tablet. Screencasting technologies such as DU Recorder and CameraFI are the wind that spreads the seeds globally to billions. With literally one click, these apps can instantly spread the content across the globe in high definition.

Simply blocking KODI add-ons will not fix the problem. Instead, blocking them will cause these add-ons to laterally migrate to other sources. Bringing lawsuits against developers of KODI add-ons and requesting that internet service providers (ISPs) block access to them does nothing to stop screencasting. The users can simply acquire recorded content on their devices from sources such as Netflix, Amazon, Hulu or live content on ESPN GO, MLB.tv or Premier League on Fubo.tv, and the content will continue to be spread globally.