real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
* May 14, 2011 01:30am EST* 0 CommentsReal Accuses Hollywood of Antitrust ViolationsBy Mark Hachman*0diggsdigg Share*RealNetworks has accused a bloc of Hollywood studios of antitrust violations, arguing that the CSS copy-protection technology that they jointly license blocks a new market for backing up DVDs.Specifically, Real argued that the CSS license impedes a nascent market for "technologies that would allow a copy for fair use purposes".Real attempted to create such a market through the creation of RealDVD and the associated Facet product, which would allow consumers to copy DVDs to a hard drive. The legal monopoly that the studios have created for themselves is being extended into blocking this new market, Real claimed, which is a violation of U.S. antitrust laws.Both RealDVD and the unreleased Facet product were blocked under the terms of a temporary restraining order issued by a San Francisco district court last year, an order which has cost Real $6 million, the vast majority in litigation costs. Both RealNetworks and the Hollywood studios, together with the DVD Copy Control Association, have squared off in a San Francisco courtroom to argue the case. Closing arguments are scheduled to be held on May 21.The Content Scrambling System technology is one of the key issues on which the case revolves. Both sides have agreed that Real is a licensee of the technology; whether or not the company has adhered to its terms governing the copying of DVDs is being contested."The CSS Agreement is being used to extend a legally granted monopoly over content into separate markets – to prevent competition from technologies that would allow a copy of content for fair use purposes," Real's argument, filed Wednesday, claims. "But the making of a copy of a Studio DVD is authorized fair use under the Copyright Act, so the Studios have no "authority" to grant or withhold with respect to that content. Nevertheless, the DVD CCA and Studios claim that the CSS Agreement grants the Studios such authority, and that anyone seeking to compete with them in that separate market violates not only the CSS Agreement, but is also subject to criminal penalties under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act."The studios contend that a consumer has no such right under the terms of "fair use". But they are willing to grant such rights under a special version of the DVD with a "digital copy" feature, which can be purchased at retailers for a premium.Real also argued that those studios essentially entered into a collective agreement under the CSS terms, as administered by the DVD Copy Control Association. That agreement also prevented Real from negotiating with individual studios, it argued."Any individual Studio could have decided not to enter into an agreement with RealNetworks and to sue to prevent its customers from using RealDVD to make copies of that Studio's titles," Real said. "Doing so individually, however, risked the possibility that another Studio might reach an agreement with RealNetworks to promote its titles in connection with the release of a popular new product. The litigating Studio then would face what could be a legal and public relations nightmare."The CCA therefore represents an "illegal horizontal agreement," referring to an agreement made by competing firms for the purposes of reducing competition, Real said."In other words, in order for an individual studio to grant such authority, the group acting as a whole through the DVD CCA would need to amend their agreement," Real said. "The CSS Agreement, which is a product of the joint conduct of the DVD CCA and the Studios, therefore memorializes the illegal horizontal agreement to boycott any potential competitor."
* May 14, 2011 01:30am EST* 0 CommentsReal Accuses Hollywood of Antitrust ViolationsBy Mark Hachman*0diggsdigg Share*RealNetworks has accused a bloc of Hollywood studios of antitrust violations, arguing that the CSS copy-
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
technology that they jointly license blocks a new market for backing up DVDs.Specifically, Real argued that the CSS license impedes a nascent market for "
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
that would allow a copy for fair use purposes".Real attempted to create such a market through the creation of RealDVD and the associated Facet product, which would allow consumers to copy DVDs to a hard drive. The legal monopoly that the studios have created for themselves is being extended into blocking this new market, Real claimed, which is a violation of U.S. antitrust laws.Both RealDVD and the unreleased Facet product were blocked
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
the terms of a temporary restraining order issued by a San Francisco
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
court last year, an order which has cost Real $6 million, the vast majority in litigation costs. Both RealNetworks and the Hollywood studios, together with the DVD Copy Control Association, have squared off in a San Francisco courtroom to argue the case. Closing arguments are scheduled to be held on May 21.The Content Scrambling System technology is one of the key issues on which the case revolves. Both sides have agreed that Real is a licensee of the technology; whether or not the company has adhered to its terms governing the copying of DVDs is being contested."The CSS Agreement is being used to extend a legally granted monopoly over content into separate markets – to prevent competition from technologies that would allow a copy of content for fair use purposes," Real's argument, filed
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
, claims. "But the making of a copy of a Studio DVD is authorized fair use under the Copyright Act, so the Studios have no "authority" to grant or withhold with respect to that content. Nevertheless, the DVD CCA and Studios claim that the CSS Agreement grants the Studios such authority, and that anyone seeking to compete with them in that separate market violates not only the CSS Agreement, but is also subject to criminal penalties under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act."The studios contend that a consumer has no such right under the terms of "fair use". But they are willing to grant such rights under a special version of the DVD with a "digital copy" feature, which can be purchased at retailers for a premium.Real also argued that those studios essentially entered into a collective agreement under the CSS terms, as administered by the DVD Copy Control Association. That agreement also prevented Real from negotiating with individual studios, it argued."Any individual Studio could have decided not to enter into an agreement with RealNetworks and to sue to prevent its customers from using RealDVD to make copies of that Studio's titles," Real said. "Doing so individually, however, risked the possibility that another Studio might reach an agreement with RealNetworks to promote its titles in connection with the release of a popular new product. The litigating Studio then would face what could be a legal and public relations nightmare."
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
CCA therefore represents an "illegal horizontal agreement," referring to an agreement made by competing firms for the
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
of reducing competition, Real said."In other words, in order for an individual studio to grant such
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
, the group acting as a whole through the DVD CCA would need to amend their agreement," Real said. "The CSS Agreement, which is a product of the joint conduct of the DVD CCA and the
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
, therefore memorializes the illegal horizontal agreement to boycott any
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
competitor."
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
* May 14, 2011 01:30am EST* 0 CommentsReal Accuses Hollywood of Antitrust ViolationsBy Mark Hachman*0diggsdigg Share*RealNetworks has accused a bloc of Hollywood studios of antitrust violations, arguing that the CSS copy-protection technology that they jointly license blocks a new market for backing up DVDs.Specifically, Real argued that the CSS license impedes a nascent market for "technologies that would allow a copy for fair use purposes".Real attempted to create such a market through the creation of RealDVD and the associated Facet product, which would allow consumers to copy DVDs to a hard drive. The legal monopoly that the studios have created for themselves is being extended into blocking this new market, Real claimed, which is a violation of U.S. antitrust laws.Both RealDVD and the unreleased Facet product were blocked under the terms of a temporary restraining order issued by a San Francisco district court last year, an order which has cost Real $6 million, the vast majority in litigation costs. Both RealNetworks and the Hollywood studios, together with the DVD Copy Control Association, have squared off in a San Francisco courtroom to argue the case. Closing arguments are scheduled to be held on May 21.The Content Scrambling System technology is one of the key issues on which the case revolves. Both sides have agreed that Real is a licensee of the technology; whether or not the company has adhered to its terms governing the copying of DVDs is being contested."The CSS Agreement is being used to extend a legally granted monopoly over content into separate markets – to prevent competition from technologies that would allow a copy of content for fair use purposes," Real's argument, filed Wednesday, claims. "But the making of a copy of a Studio DVD is authorized fair use under the Copyright Act, so the Studios have no "authority" to grant or withhold with respect to that content. Nevertheless, the DVD CCA and Studios claim that the CSS Agreement grants the Studios such authority, and that anyone seeking to compete with them in that separate market violates not only the CSS Agreement, but is also subject to criminal penalties under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act."The studios contend that a consumer has no such right under the terms of "fair use". But they are willing to grant such rights under a special version of the DVD with a "digital copy" feature, which can be purchased at retailers for a premium.Real also argued that those studios essentially entered into a collective agreement under the CSS terms, as administered by the DVD Copy Control Association. That agreement also prevented Real from negotiating with individual studios, it argued."Any individual Studio could have decided not to enter into an agreement with RealNetworks and to sue to prevent its customers from using RealDVD to make copies of that Studio's titles," Real said. "Doing so individually, however, risked the possibility that another Studio might reach an agreement with RealNetworks to promote its titles in connection with the release of a popular new product. The litigating Studio then would face what could be a legal and public relations nightmare."The CCA therefore represents an "illegal horizontal agreement," referring to an agreement made by competing firms for the purposes of reducing competition, Real said."In other words, in order for an individual studio to grant such authority, the group acting as a whole through the DVD CCA would need to amend their agreement," Real said. "The CSS Agreement, which is a product of the joint conduct of the DVD CCA and the Studios, therefore memorializes the illegal horizontal agreement to boycott any potential competitor."
* May 14, 2011 01:30am EST* 0 CommentsReal Accuses Hollywood of Antitrust ViolationsBy Mark Hachman*0diggsdigg Share*RealNetworks has accused a bloc of Hollywood studios of antitrust violations, arguing that the CSS copy-
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
technology that they jointly license blocks a new market for backing up DVDs.Specifically, Real argued that the CSS license impedes a nascent market for "
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
that would allow a copy for fair use purposes".Real attempted to create such a market through the creation of RealDVD and the associated Facet product, which would allow consumers to copy DVDs to a hard drive. The legal monopoly that the studios have created for themselves is being extended into blocking this new market, Real claimed, which is a violation of U.S. antitrust laws.Both RealDVD and the unreleased Facet product were blocked
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
the terms of a temporary restraining order issued by a San Francisco
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
court last year, an order which has cost Real $6 million, the vast majority in litigation costs. Both RealNetworks and the Hollywood studios, together with the DVD Copy Control Association, have squared off in a San Francisco courtroom to argue the case. Closing arguments are scheduled to be held on May 21.The Content Scrambling System technology is one of the key issues on which the case revolves. Both sides have agreed that Real is a licensee of the technology; whether or not the company has adhered to its terms governing the copying of DVDs is being contested."The CSS Agreement is being used to extend a legally granted monopoly over content into separate markets – to prevent competition from technologies that would allow a copy of content for fair use purposes," Real's argument, filed
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
, claims. "But the making of a copy of a Studio DVD is authorized fair use under the Copyright Act, so the Studios have no "authority" to grant or withhold with respect to that content. Nevertheless, the DVD CCA and Studios claim that the CSS Agreement grants the Studios such authority, and that anyone seeking to compete with them in that separate market violates not only the CSS Agreement, but is also subject to criminal penalties under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act."The studios contend that a consumer has no such right under the terms of "fair use". But they are willing to grant such rights under a special version of the DVD with a "digital copy" feature, which can be purchased at retailers for a premium.Real also argued that those studios essentially entered into a collective agreement under the CSS terms, as administered by the DVD Copy Control Association. That agreement also prevented Real from negotiating with individual studios, it argued."Any individual Studio could have decided not to enter into an agreement with RealNetworks and to sue to prevent its customers from using RealDVD to make copies of that Studio's titles," Real said. "Doing so individually, however, risked the possibility that another Studio might reach an agreement with RealNetworks to promote its titles in connection with the release of a popular new product. The litigating Studio then would face what could be a legal and public relations nightmare."
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
CCA therefore represents an "illegal horizontal agreement," referring to an agreement made by competing firms for the
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
of reducing competition, Real said."In other words, in order for an individual studio to grant such
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
, the group acting as a whole through the DVD CCA would need to amend their agreement," Real said. "The CSS Agreement, which is a product of the joint conduct of the DVD CCA and the
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
, therefore memorializes the illegal horizontal agreement to boycott any
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
competitor."
real accuses hollywood of antitrust violations
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire