MPAA So Thrilled With Zediva Ruling, It Offers To Help The Court Spread It
from the nice-of-them dept
We recently wrote about the decision by a district court judge that suggests if you have a very long cable, instead of a short cable, you may be committing copyright infringement. The exact length of the cable is not specified. This is, of course, ridiculous, but it's the only way to read the judge's ruling in the Zediva case that makes sense. Basically, if you have your DVD player at home, you're okay. But if your DVD player is in Zediva's data center, and you connect to it via the long cable of the internet, Zediva is infringing. I can't see how this makes any sense, but that's why they don't let me be a judge.Either way, it's not very surprising that Zediva is appealing the ruling to the Ninth Circuit appeals court, which is somewhat famous for its inconsistent and, at times, contradictory approach to jurisprudence. In other words, who knows what will come out of the appeals court. It's tough to predict.
But, in the meantime, the MPAA apparently wants to get as much mileage as possible about the original ruling by Judge John F. Walter. It appears they're so in love with the ruling that they're sending love letters to the court about how more people should see the ruling, and how they're even willing to help out with the promotion:
On Thursday, attorneys for the movie studio asked Judge Walter to consider publishing his injunction order in the Federal Register so that other judges around the nation currently overseeing Internet copyright cases would have the benefit of seeing what they believe to be an astute analysis of the "transmit" clause in the Copyright Act and what it means for Internet streaming transmissions to be "to the public" under the clause. The plaintiffs also say they would be more than happy to submit the judge's opinion on his behalf to the Westlaw database.In other words, this ruling is so ridiculous and so one-sided, that the MPAA hopes to get it ingrained among judges everywhere as quickly as possible, knowing full well that a higher court might knock them back to reality, and point out that judging whether or not something is infringing by the length of the cable between the DVD player and the TV is simply ridiculous.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Reply
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Could backfire
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Could backfire
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BoyCott Hollywood !!!
Buy Only Used Physical Products !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Thats interesting, if a corporation is a person, would bankrupting a corporation be murder? ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
MPAA/RIAA are one of the worst sources of corruption in our government. They inhibit culture while exploiting people by purchasing laws.
I consider welfare lifers and drug dealers higher than them.
Many welfare people are just leeches. Most drug dealers are passively causing destruction because there is demand for their product.
MPAA/RIAA active go out of their way and spend billions trying to screw over the general population.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1. New startup pays a moderate licence fee for movies, not too high so that they can enjoy a profit.
2. Don't sue them.
3. Reap the rewards, without doing any work.
Stupid business plan.
1. New startup is charged ridiculously high licensing fees.
2. Sue them.
3. Only get a one time amount of money.
4. No new startups appear, out of fear of being sued.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Confusing...
Following his logic, there can be no such thing as a private performance. You know, like you purchase a dvd for yourself to watch at home. Since you are a member of the public, by it's very nature, any performance of that dvd is a public performance, no matter the cord length.
Please, can anyone prove me wrong based on this ruling? I would love to know it. You know, since I own a few bookcases of way too expensive dvds that the judge said I can't watch with the "license" that I purchased.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Confusing...
Following his logic, there can be no such thing as a private performance. You know, like you purchase a dvd for yourself to watch at home. Since you are a member of the public, by it's very nature, any performance of that dvd is a public performance, no matter the cord length.
This is the kind of contorted reasoning you get when you start with the conclusion you want to arrive at and then try to twist the law and/or the facts to fit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Confusing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Confusing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Confusing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can't see how this makes any sense, but that's why they don't let me be a judge. I guess the MAFIAA would make excellent judges!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"the wire between my DVD player and my TV is 10 feet..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "the wire between my DVD player and my TV is 10 feet..."
Sorry. Wrong again. The judge defined the viewer as public, not the player.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "the wire between my DVD player and my TV is 10 feet..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "the wire between my DVD player and my TV is 10 feet..."
There are a lot of businesses that rent out DVDs and Players. They are not as common now as they were in the days of VHS, but they are still out there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "the wire between my DVD player and my TV is 10 feet..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "the wire between my DVD player and my TV is 10 feet..."
It's not /your/ DVD player, it's one owned by a corporation and rented excclusively to you for the duration of the performance and streaming to you only over the internet.
So the situation is exactly as if you paid a service company to have a rented DVD player in your home and for their employees to come around and insert rented DVD's into it.
I don't always disagree with you - sometimes you have some good points but here you are definitely misunderstanding the situation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "the wire between my DVD player and my TV is 10 feet..."
No, wrong.
This is not "to many people", this is to a single individual renter (who *MAY* be viewing with family and/or friends).
If you choose to speak inaccurately you choose to spread FUD.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "the wire between my DVD player and my TV is 10 feet..."
I have to wonder if this isn't being done on purpose by some perverse genius trying to drive innovation towards an unbreakable distribution scheme. Just like music sharing after Napster, every time the MAFIAA finds and kills one of these companies, their replacements are always more efficient and more secure distribution models. At this point this has to be purposeful action.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "the wire between my DVD player and my TV is 10 feet..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Making Sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Making Sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Making Sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Making Sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Making Sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Making Sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Making Sense
Think of your local Ford dealer as part of a business - so how is it YOUR car is in Their business - when it is being fixed?
Location does not determine ownership.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Making Sense
Proof in the pudding that the device is not under the complete control of the end user.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Making Sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Making Sense
Are you trying to say that all data centres are now in direct ownership of any equipment co-located there? That would make some interesting legal arguments...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My Cables too long
Maybe MPAA should require warning labels on the DVD and Cable packaging regarding potentially illegal activities associated with the use of this product. It would certainly apply to the minors and those who rent DVD’s for group consumption. I know… Let’s require a Web Cam on every DVD player so the MAPP can count the number of people viewing the DVD. They could create software the counts the occupants of the room and charge accordingly. Just enter your credit card number to view the movie.
We are pathetic… This is the level of intelligence on this planet… Beam Me UP!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: My Cables too long
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: My Cables too long
Somewhere in my mind is the memory of a story of a TV that could see who was in the room, and guess ages and gender.
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-06-nhk-tv.html
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/9 3698-the-big-brother-tv-that-watches-you
Its possible, they just need to figure out the correct way to use "Its for the children" or "It will stop terrorists" to get a law passed demanding the tech everywhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I wholly agree with this statement, but see it slightly differently. It's not so much the length of the cable, but the fact that there is more than one cable between the DVD player and the television.
Small difference, equally as stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They did this to avoid the insane streaming fees, and to avoid hassles with the law.
The customer gets the EXCLUSIVE use of "their" DVD player that they have paid to rent, and they get the EXCLUSIVE use of the physical DVD they rented.
So now Zediva is being told because an end user might do something the MPAA doesn't like (not always illegal things mind you) they are illegal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
They did this to avoid the insane streaming fees, and to avoid hassles with the law."
That is my understanding as well. My point is that since they don't specify what length cable is too long, maybe their argument is that the transmission has to pass through many switches and repeaters (i.e. more than one cable) instead of directly from the DVD player to the TV.
As ComputerAddict pointed out above, by this argument many home theater setups would also be infringing.
I don't agree with either argument; they're equally stupid. I was just commenting that maybe their 'reasoning' isn't the length of the cable, rather the number of cables (or, put another way, that the DVD player and TV are not directly coupled with one cable).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OMG...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The sloth of Zediva
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And knowing now, how easy it is to replicate media - a fair price is not what it used to be.
A movie is certainly not worth $40.00 to me now, not even $20.00...
I can just wait a bit and catch it on the on-demand subscriptions I have..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is a Tardian nightmare, I know... but change is on the way!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Many cases are going the other way too - Righthaven (xN) ACS law, Davenport Lyons etc etc.
Even if all your legal dreams come true it won't persuade people to go back to buying lots of overpriced stuff. The reason the mass content copying industry is failing IS the internet - but it ISN'T piracy - it IS Facebook, Twitter and Youtube (and I mean genuine user produced content here - I watch lots of stuff on Youtube - but almost never mainstream stuff). These things just give people so many more options for their leisure and entertainment.
Also bear in mind that the money that pays for video games is a zero sum with that which pays for music and movies so as the former rises the latter must fall to some extent.
You're simply indulging in wishful thinking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: the ruling against ....
I welcome your opposing opinion but if you won't even try to support it then I won't credit you any credibility.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: the ruling against ....
http://torrentfreak.com/hotfile-ordered-to-share-user-data-with-the-mpaa-110830/
"Firstly this means that Hotfile has to disclose details on all files ever uploaded to Hotfile, including the title, number of downloads and the IP-addresses of the uploaders and downloaders."
Read it and weep.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hotfile Ruling
I do feel that is it wrong to persecute the host company because it users choose to utilize it for questionable (if not illegal) purposes. They are the target because they are an easy target, and an easy "choke-point" to attempt to curtail illegal activity. And I understand the argument that some make saying that they are in business solely to support this illegal activity. But that is far too broad a statement. It may even be true that many file sharing sites would not be successful with out the illegal activity, but A) the site is not committing the activity and B) "infringing" files are not the only files that can be used on the sites.
Again the end users are choosing to use the site for what they choose. If they are in the wrong pursue them.
I know this is a hated argument but you don't (successfully) blame gun makers because people use their products to commit crimes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hotfile Ruling
Hotfile runs one of those "pay to download faster" programs, and cuts the original uploader in as an affiliate. That means that the more popular the content, the more money the affiliate makes.
The "pay for download faster" model absolutely depends on selling the content, not the service. Without content that people really, really, really want and are willing to pay a little to avoid paying retail, you cannot sell them a faster download.
Pretty much the entire file locker business may die as a result of this process, but Mike sure ain't covering it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hotfile Ruling
And it's amazing how gleeful you are about that. If this were a different time and a different legal challenge, would you be just as happy that "the entire VCR business may die as a result of this process", or "the entire DVD player business may die as a result of this process", or "the entire MP3 player business may die as a result of this process"?
Face it, there is no technology that has ever been successfully killed by legal processes. You need to give up on that pipe dream.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hotfile Ruling
I have absolutely no doubt that AC would have been on the side of the "Boston Stranger" and "home taping is killing music" sides in previous eras. Probably doing his best to kill those industries before they could be effectively monetised, too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hotfile Ruling
lol, yeah good luck with that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: the ruling against ....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: the ruling against ....
Are you still on this? I already explained why we didn't cover it, and yet you're still claiming we're ignoring it?
A minor ruling on discovery is not a big deal. Nothing about this ruling was big or surprising. Anyone who thinks it is doesn't know the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: the ruling against ....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Are they encouraging free sharing for the ruling?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You've missed the point...
I put "published" in scare quotes because, even if this were not designated as a "published" case, it is still available to other courts and is printed in a series called the "federal appendix." The difference is that once a case is "published" by the court in the formal sense, it becomes binding precedent on subsequent courts. If it is not designated as "published", it is just printed in the "federal appendix" but other courts would not rely on it. Unpublished (but printed) cases are like a judicial FYI--they are nice to know about, but they don't ultimately matter so much to subsequent courts.
"Spreading the word" is not the issue. What the MPAA is really doing is trying to get the judge to say that this decision should be binding precedent on other courts that hear similar cases.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Slingbox
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MPAA tyranny
But these people's minds are so eaten up with greed, even if it did happen they'd find something else to blame it on. The RIAA has insisted on suing their customers back to the stone age, their sales have tanked, and they can't figure out why. I guess they're still blaming it all on downloading.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]