decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
It doesn't appear to be a contractual issue | 393 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
It doesn't appear to be a contractual issue
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 25 2012 @ 05:43 PM EDT
Well, of course it's about copyright to an extent. A cable company isn't allowed
to show the programming at all without permission from the copyright holder.
That permission comes in the form of a contract.

But does the contract prohibit time shifting? Of course you can do that
yourself, but that doesn't mean the cable company is allowed to do it.

Does the contract prohibit streaming? Obviously this can't be real time, since
you can't skip ads into the future, so it could be interpreted as streaming.
Will it be? I dunno.

Sure, I'd like to be able to skip ads more conveniently too. But the real world
consequence is that broadcast channels will just end up charging cable companies
a lot more. I don't know what they charge now, but I'm betting it's a lot less
than, say, ESPN.

So either you'll end up paying more for cable tv, or broadcast channels will
block their channels on cable, or they'll go out of business (not likely in the
near term). I'm not taking sides which is better ...just sayin'.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

It doesn't appear to be a contractual issue
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 25 2012 @ 05:48 PM EDT
Oh...I should've on fair use...

I don't think watching the *entire* tv show should qualify as fair use. Or
reselling a magazine with all the ads blacked out with a marker. Or, to put it
closer to home, removing all the comments and copyright notices, from a GPL
program, leaving only the desirable content, and compiling it into a proprietary
program.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

It doesn't appear to be a contractual issue
Authored by: darrellb on Saturday, May 26 2012 @ 07:35 AM EDT
I wonder if CBS has filed copyright registrations on their compilations. That
is, the specific combination of broadcast content and commercial content? It
would seem that to claim a compilation, CBS would be filing thousands upon
thousands of copyright registrations a year. One for each set of show(s) plus
commerical(s) that they wish to protect as a whole.

Otherwise, where is the compilation and where is the copyright registration that
must exist prior to filing suit?

The network can't sue of making a derivitive of a single show since the show
itself isn't modified. The network can't sue over *not* making a derivitive of a
commericial, even assuming that the network owns the commericial becuase the
commerical isn't modified.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • Filing copyright - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 26 2012 @ 08:21 AM EDT
    • Filing copyright - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 28 2012 @ 07:08 AM EDT
Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )