Cablevision Files nDVR Counterclaim vs. Film Studios, Nets
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Anthony Crupi[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]JUNE 07, 2006 -
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Cablevision has filed a counterclaim against the film studios and television networks that are trying to legally block the MSO's plans to introduce network-based digital video recorder service, claiming its nDVR is protected by fair use.
In an 18-page rebuttal filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Cablevision defended itself against a lawsuit filed in May by Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., Universal Studios, Paramount Pictures, Disney, CBS, ABC and NBC that claimed the MSO's nDVR would violate copyright law.
Arguing that nDVR adheres to fair use precedent, Cablevision cited the 1984 Supreme Court ruling in the case of Sony Corporation of America v. Universal City Studios (aka, "the Betamax case"), noting, "As with the transition from the Betamax to VCRs, the transition from VCRs to DVRs altered the specific technology of in-home television recording; however, the DVR, like the VCR and the Betamax before it, remains a time-shifting device that facilitates fair use."
The fair use precedent established by the Betamax case gives consumers limited use of copyrighted material, allowing people to make copies of purchased music or movies for their own personal use, without having to gain permission from the original rights holders.
Cablevision argued that storing copyrighted content at its head-end servers––as is the case in an nDVR scenario––is materially no different than allowing a subscriber to store content on a standalone DVR. "Like the Betamax, the VCR and the traditional set-top storage DVR before it, [nDVR] enables consumers to do nothing more than record television programming for later personal viewing, it does not infringe copyrights," the filing read.
All parties are scheduled to meet at the courthouse in lower Manhattan later this afternoon to establish a timetable for sharing discovery evidence before the trial begins. At present, no date has been established for a trial.
In the penultimate page of the filing, Cablevision petitioned the court to find that its nDVR service will not subject it to liability for copyright infringement. The company also asked that its attorneys’ fees be absorbed by the studios and networks that brought the original suit on May 24.
Although Time Warner properties Cartoon Network and CNN also joined the suit against Cablevision, Time Warner Cable chief financial officer John Martin has said that his cable systems would probably follow Cablevision’s nDVR lead provided the legality of the service can be established.
Cablevision did not name either Cartoon net or CNN in its counterclaim.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Anthony Crupi[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]JUNE 07, 2006 -
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Cablevision has filed a counterclaim against the film studios and television networks that are trying to legally block the MSO's plans to introduce network-based digital video recorder service, claiming its nDVR is protected by fair use.
In an 18-page rebuttal filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Cablevision defended itself against a lawsuit filed in May by Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., Universal Studios, Paramount Pictures, Disney, CBS, ABC and NBC that claimed the MSO's nDVR would violate copyright law.
Arguing that nDVR adheres to fair use precedent, Cablevision cited the 1984 Supreme Court ruling in the case of Sony Corporation of America v. Universal City Studios (aka, "the Betamax case"), noting, "As with the transition from the Betamax to VCRs, the transition from VCRs to DVRs altered the specific technology of in-home television recording; however, the DVR, like the VCR and the Betamax before it, remains a time-shifting device that facilitates fair use."
The fair use precedent established by the Betamax case gives consumers limited use of copyrighted material, allowing people to make copies of purchased music or movies for their own personal use, without having to gain permission from the original rights holders.
Cablevision argued that storing copyrighted content at its head-end servers––as is the case in an nDVR scenario––is materially no different than allowing a subscriber to store content on a standalone DVR. "Like the Betamax, the VCR and the traditional set-top storage DVR before it, [nDVR] enables consumers to do nothing more than record television programming for later personal viewing, it does not infringe copyrights," the filing read.
All parties are scheduled to meet at the courthouse in lower Manhattan later this afternoon to establish a timetable for sharing discovery evidence before the trial begins. At present, no date has been established for a trial.
In the penultimate page of the filing, Cablevision petitioned the court to find that its nDVR service will not subject it to liability for copyright infringement. The company also asked that its attorneys’ fees be absorbed by the studios and networks that brought the original suit on May 24.
Although Time Warner properties Cartoon Network and CNN also joined the suit against Cablevision, Time Warner Cable chief financial officer John Martin has said that his cable systems would probably follow Cablevision’s nDVR lead provided the legality of the service can be established.
Cablevision did not name either Cartoon net or CNN in its counterclaim.[/FONT]
