Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On June 25, 2014, a 6-3 majority of the U.S. Supreme Court held that Aereo's streaming service ' which allowed customers to view over-the-air TV broadcasts via the Internet ' violated the broadcasters' public performance right under the Copyright Act. Applying what the dissent derided as “an improvised standard ('looks-like-cable-TV'),” the majority held that Aereo infringed copyrights owned by the television networks. The Court was careful to attempt to limit the reach of its holding, leaving many issues as to different technologies unanswered. But however those questions may be resolved in future cases, the Supreme Court's decision appeared to doom the “view” functionality of Aereo's Internet/mobile device transmission service, and likely the company along with it. American Broadcasting Companies v. Aereo, Inc., 134 S.Ct. 896, 2014 WL 2864485, 2014 U.S. Lexis 4496 (2014).
The bottom line: Notwithstanding Aereo's deployment of a complex transmission system carefully designed to avoid copyright infringement, the High Court found Aereo liable for direct infringement on the ground that Aereo had “performed” the copyrighted works and that Aereo's performances were “public.” That conclusion was substantially driven by the Court's sense that Aereo's viewing service was functionally equivalent to cable TV, and therefore a contrary result would be inconsistent with Congress's intent when it amended the Copyright Act in 1976 to apply copyright restrictions to cable.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.