Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
ABC v. Aereo - Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Petitioners

ABC v. Aereo - Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Petitioners

Ratings: (0)|Views: 16|Likes:
Published by Devlin Hartline
United States amicus brief in Aereo appeal.
United States amicus brief in Aereo appeal.

More info:

Published by: Devlin Hartline on Mar 09, 2014
Copyright:Public Domain

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/11/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
No. 13-461
 In the Supreme Court of the United States
 
 A 
MERICAN
B
ROADCASTING
C
OMPANIES
,
 
I
NC
.,
 ET AL
.,
 PETITIONERS
 
v.
  A 
EREO
,
 
I
NC
.,
 FKA
B
 AMBOOM
L
 ABS
,
 
I
NC
.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS  FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING PETITIONERS
J
 ACQUELINE
C.
 
C
HARLESWORTH
General Counsel
S
 ARANG
 V 
IJAY
D
 AMLE
 
 Special Advisor to the General Counsel
S
TEPHEN
S.
 
R
UWE
 J
OHN
R.
 
R
ILEY 
 
 Attorneys United States Copyright Office Washington, D.C. 20540
E
DWIN
S.
 
K
NEEDLER
 
 Deputy Solicitor General Counsel of Record
S
TUART
F.
 
D
ELERY 
 
 Assistant Attorney General
M
 ALCOLM
L.
 
S
TEWART
 
 Deputy Solicitor General
B
RIAN
H.
 
F
LETCHER
 
 Assistant to the Solicitor General
M
 ARK
R.
 
F
REEMAN
 S
ONIA
K.
 
M
C
N
EIL
 
 Attorneys  Department of Justice Washington, D.C. 20530-0001  SupremeCtBriefs@usdoj.gov (202) 514-2217
 
 (I)
QUESTION
 
PRESENTED
The Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. 101
et seq.
, grants the owner of copyright in an audiovisual work the exclusive right “to perform the copyrighted work publicly.” 17 U.S.C. 106(4). Respondent’s service enables paying subscribers to receive copyrighted broadcast television programs over the Internet by using thousands of miniature antennas to capture, create, and stream an individual digital copy of a broadcast program to each subscriber who seeks to  watch it. The question presented is as follows:  Whether respondent’s service infringes petitioners’ exclusive right “to perform [their] copyrighted  work[s] publicly.”
 
 (III)
TABLE
 
OF
 
CONTENTS
PageInterest of the United States ........................................................ 1
Statement .................................................................................... 2
 
Summary of argument ............................................................. 11
 
 Argument ................................................................................... 14
 I. Respondent performs copyrighted works publicly in violation of 17 U.S.C. 106(4) ....................................... 16  A. Respondent “performs” copyrighted  works .......................................................................... 17 B. Respondent transmits performances of copyrighted broadcast programming “to the public” .................................................................. 23 II. Reversal of the judgment below need not threaten cloud computing ............................................................... 31
Conclusion ................................................................................. 34
 
TABLE
 
OF
 
AUTHORITIES
Cases:
 Buck
 v.
 Jewell-LaSalle Realty Co
., 283 U.S. 191 (1931) .................................................................................. 2, 26
Capital Cities Cable, Inc.
 v.
Crisp
, 467 U.S. 691 (1984) ........................................................................................ 5
Cartoon Network LP, LLLP
 v.
CSC Holdings, Inc.
, 536 F.3d 121 (2d Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 557 U.S. 946 (2009) ......................................................................
 passim Community Television of Utah, LLC 
 v.
 Aereo, Inc.
, No. 2:13-cv-910, 2014 WL 642828 (D. Utah Feb. 19, 2014), appeal pending, No. 14-4020 (10th Cir. dock-eted Feb. 20, 2014) ................................................................ 24
CoStar Grp., Inc.
 v.
 LoopNet, Inc.
, 373 F.3d 544 (4th Cir. 2004) ........................................................................ 19
 Fortnightly Corp
. v.
United Artists Television, Inc
., 392 U.S. 390 (1968) ................................................. 2, 3, 17, 22

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->