EFFector Vol. 15, No. 17 June 6, 2002 ren@eff.org
A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424
EFFector Vol. 15, No. 17 June 6, 2002 ren@eff.org
A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424
For more information on EFF activities & alerts: http://www.eff.org/
To join EFF or make an additional donation:
http://www.eff.org/support/
EFF is a member-supported nonprofit. Please sign up as a member today!
Los Angeles - ReplayTV customers today sued the entertainment industry to protect their rights to skip over commercials and record television programs for later viewing using digital video recorders.
Responding to both the lawsuit brought against ReplayTV and the industry's public claims that these actions are "theft," five customers, represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Ira Rothken of the Rothken Law Firm in San Rafael, filed a federal lawsuit in Los Angeles asking the court to rule that their use of the ReplayTV device is legal under copyright law.
"The studios are using their copyrights as an excuse to control what individuals do with their own property in the privacy of their own homes," said EFF Intellectual Property Attorney Robin Gross.
"These Hollywood guys want to stop me from using my digital video recorder like I use my VCR, like for watching shows when I want or zipping through commercials," explained Craig Newmark, craigslist.com community founder, ReplayTV user, and plaintiff in the case. "I want to give my nephews and nieces a break from the rampant consumerism on TV by using ReplayTV's commercial skipping feature."
Last October, dozens of Hollywood movie and television studios sued ReplayTV and SonicBlue for making and distributing personal video recorders, claiming that consumers' use of such devices constitutes copyright violation and seeking a broad injunction that would prevent the further use, support, or sale of the machines.
Along with Newmark, ReplayTV customers filing the lawsuit with legal representation by the EFF are: Keith Ogden, owner of a financial broker firm in San Francisco; Shawn Hughes, a small business owner in Georgia; Seattle journalist Glenn Fleishman; and southern Californian video engineer Phil Wright.
Press release:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Newmark_v_Turner/20020606_eff_pr.html
EFF complaint against entertainment industry:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Newmark_v_Turner/20020606_complaint.html
EFF case portal on Newmark et al. v Paramount et al.:
http://www.eff.org/sc/newmark/
EFF case archive on Paramount v. ReplayTV case:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Paramount_v_ReplayTV
Paramount complaint against ReplayTV:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Paramount_v_ReplayTV/20011031_complaint.html
craigslist.com announcement on ReplayTV case:
http://www.craigslist.org/craig.vs.hollywood.html
Robin Gross
Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
robin@eff.org
+1 415 436-9333 x112 (office), +1 415 637-5310 (cell)
Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org
+1 415 436-9333 x123 (office), +1 415 215-6087 (cell)
The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading civil liberties
organization working to protect rights in the digital world. Founded in
1990, EFF actively encourages and challenges industry and government to
support free expression, privacy, and openness in the information
society. EFF is a member-supported organization and maintains one of the
most linked-to Web sites in the world:
http://www.eff.org
- end -
Los Angeles - On Thursday, May 30, District Court Judge Florence Marie Cooper rejected Hollywood's effort to force ReplayTV to develop and install "spyware" to monitor the viewing habits of ReplayTV owners.
In October 2001, ReplayTV was sued in Los Angeles by 28 movie studios, television networks, and cable networks, which allege that owners of ReplayTV PVRs infringe copyrights when they skip commercials and share shows and that ReplayTV should be held responsible for these infringements.
As part of preliminary discovery in the case, the Hollywood plaintiffs demanded that ReplayTV develop and install software that would monitor the viewing habits of ReplayTV owners. On April 26, 2002, a magistrate judge granted Hollywood's demand. EFF, along with a number of other civil liberties and privacy organizations, joined in an amicus brief filed by Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) asking the district court to reverse the magistrate's ruling.
"As this incident makes clear, when Hollywood goes after technology companies instead of infringers, they often trample on the rights of innocent technology users," said Fred von Lohmann, EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney. "We are pleased that the court agreed that Hollywood is not entitled to order Replay to spy on its own customers."
The court's May 30, 2002 order
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Paramount_v_ReplayTV/20020531_replay_discovery_reversal.pdf
Amicus brief by EPIC, in which EFF joined:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/replaytv/amici_brief_eick_order.pdf
For general background on the ReplayTV lawsuit
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Paramount_v_ReplayTV/20020531_replay_ca_lawyer.pdf
For other case documents
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Paramount_v_ReplayTV/
Fred von Lohmann
EFF Senior Intellectual Property Atty.
fred@eff.org
+1 415-436-9333 x123
- end -
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), along with other non-profit organizations and publishers, on Tuesday criticized a Hollywood-backed plan to restrict digital TV equipment. The proposal, which aims at legislative control over television, was unveiled Tuesday in a report by the Broadcast Protection Discussion Group (BPDG).
"Hollywood studios are demanding that the consumer electronics industry redesign digital televisions," said EFF Staff Technologist Seth Schoen. "Congress, industry, and consumers must all reject Hollywood's attempt to force an unconscionable government mandate restricting technology innovation and the rights of digital television consumers."
If implemented, the BPDG's recommendations would restrict consumers from making and distributing legal copies of programs broadcast on digital television.
A sample of the organizations endorsing EFF's comments are: DigitalConsumer.org; the Free Software Foundation; HDNet; Phillips; and The Computer and Communications Industry Association.
BPDG was founded in November 2001 as a sub-group of the Copy Protection Technical Working Group (CPTWG). Allegedly representing an industry consensus, BPDG recently attained a high profile as a possible alternative to the controversial Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act (CBDTPA). EFF staff have participated in BPDG's meetings and conference calls since its inception.
EFF submitted comments that were included as a dissenting opinion within the BPDG's final report. For the full press release and comments, see the links below.
For this release:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/HDTV/20020604_eff_bpdg_pr.html
Summary of EFF's comment on the BPDG report:
http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/archives/000121.html
Full text of EFF's comments on the BPDG report:
http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/archives/000116.html
EFF's BPDG "Consensus At Lawyerpoint" weblog:
http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/
Seth Schoen
Staff Technologist
Electronic Frontier Foundation
seth@eff.org
+1 415-436-9333 x107
Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Atty.
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org
+1 415-436-9333 x123
The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading civil liberties
organization working to protect rights in the digital world. Founded in
1990, EFF actively encourages and challenges industry and government to
support free expression, privacy, and openness in the information
society. EFF is a member-supported organization and maintains one of the
most linked-to Web sites in the world:
http://www.eff.org
- end -
At a June 3rd hearing in the case against Morpheus over file-sharing software, the court agreed to narrow the issues in the case to the proper application of the "Betamax" legal doctrine. Last Fall, Hollywood record companies sued Streamcast, KaZaa, and Grokster - all distributors of P2P file-sharing software - and asked the court to ban the software under copyright law. Earlier this year, Streamcast filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, asking the court to declare that the technology is capable of "substantial non-infringing uses" under the Supreme Court's ruling in Betamax (Universal City Studios v. Sony).
This is a positive development in the case. It indicates Judge Steven Wilson understands that the Betamax doctrine, the core legal principle protecting consumers rights to use video recordings as they choose absent explicit copyright infringement, is at the heart of this case. The parties next will be before the court on July 8th for a status conference.
Robin Gross
Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
robin@eff.org
+1 415 436-9333 x112 (office), +1 415 637-5310 (cell)
- end -
The Electronic Frontier Foundation would like to thank the good folks at United Layer Inc. (http://www.unitedlayer.com) - a San Francisco based server farm and security company - for their generous donation of space for our server and bandwidth. The EFF web server had been hosted in-house on a T1 connection - but due to the support of our members and our success - we had saturated our connection and needed a bigger pipe to the world. Last week when Slashdot published an article about us that linked to a 1.8 Meg MP3 file, United Layer stepped in to provide us the bandwidth to serve that file. Now they are donating EFF all of our web server bandwidth.
You can see who else has helped us out with goods, services, and funds by visiting our new thank you page at http://www.eff.org/thanks/index.html
- end -
EFF is looking for some good office chairs. Fighting the good fight is hard on the vertebrae, so ergonomically-minded donations are especially welcome. We are in San Francisco, so donors should probably be in the Bay Area. Contact Ren Bucholz if you have questions or donations. Thanks in advance!
Ren Bucholz
Activist
Electronic Frontier Foundation
ren@eff.org
+1 415 436-9333 x121 (office)
- end -
EFFector is published by:
The Electronic Frontier Foundation
454 Shotwell Street
San Francisco CA 94110-1914 USA
+1 415 436 9333 (voice)
+1 415 436 9993 (fax)
http://www.eff.org/
Editor:
Ren Bucholz, Activist
ren@eff.org
To Join EFF online, or make an additional donation, go to:
http://www.eff.org/support/
Membership & donation queries: membership@eff.org
General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries: ask@eff.org
Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged. Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF. To reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors for their express permission. Press releases and EFF announcements & articles may be reproduced individually at will.
To subscribe to or unsubscribe from EFFector via the Web, go to:
http://
To subscribe to EFFector via e-mail, send to majordomo@eff.org a message BODY (not
subject) of:
subscribe effector
The list server will send you a confirmation code and then add you to a
subscription list for EFFector (after you return the confirmation code;
instructions will be in the confirmation e-mail).
To unsubscribe, send a similar message body to the same address, like
so:
unsubscribe effector
(Please ask listmaster@eff.org to manually remove you from the list if this does not work for you for some reason.)
To change your address, send both commands at once, one per line (i.e., unsubscribe your old address, and subscribe your new address).
Back issues are available at:
http://www.eff.org/effector
To get the latest issue, send any message to effector-reflector@eff.org
(or er@eff.org),
and it will be mailed to you automatically. You can also get, via the Web:
http://
Return to EFFector Newsletters Index
Please send any questions or comments to webmaster@eff.org
![[*]](/home_blue_icon.gif){kind=icon}
EFF Welcome Page