In June the Supreme Court chose not to hear a copyright infringement case related to cable companies use of remote storage digital video recording. The case, filed by television and film industry companies, claims that the storage of programming on servers for On Demand use later violates copyright law because it is not done with the permission of the copyright owner.
This is an interesting twist which I'm sure becomes present each time new technologies are introduced. We have talked about it in class with Google Books and, according to the article I found, the Supreme Court heard a similar case in the 1980's related to VCRs. The opposing companies argue, '"This case presents critical questions about the application of copyright law to automated computerized services that are rapidly reshaping how copyrighted works are reproduced, delivered and consumed."'
Although a true statement, where would you draw the line? Consider the internet and the vastness of information available. Is it possible to filter through its entirety and decide what does and does not violate copyright law? The other question is, how much of a profit is Cablevision making off of their on demand services? Will it really destroy the television, film, sports and music industry? I find that doubtful and apparently so does the Supreme Court.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529424,00.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment