RealNetworks, Inc. v. DVD Copy Control Ass'n, Inc.

Last updated

RealNetworks, Inc. v. DVD Copy Control Association, Inc.
US DC NorCal.svg
Court United States District Court for the Northern District of California
DecidedAugust 11, 2009
Docket nos. 3:08-cv-04548
Citation 641 F. Supp. 2d 913
Case history
Subsequent actions No. 3:08-cv-04548, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1433 (N.D. Cal. January 8, 2010) (Antitrust claims dismissed)
Holding
RealNetworks violated the anti-trafficking provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by allowing users of RealDVD software product to make permanent backup copies of copyrighted DVDs. A preliminary injunction was granted to forbid RealNetworks from manufacturing and distributing RealDVD, or any other similar software product.
Court membership
Judge sitting Marilyn Hall Patel
Keywords
Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Anti-circumvention, Copyright

RealNetworks, Inc. v. DVD Copy Control Association, Inc., 641 F. Supp. 2d 913 (2009), is a United States District Court case involving RealNetworks, the movie studios and DVD Copy Control Association regarding the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) claims on the manufacturing and distribution of RealDVD, and a breach of license agreement. The district court concluded that RealNetworks violated the anti-circumvention and anti-trafficking provisions of the DMCA when the DVD copying software RealDVD bypasses the copy protection technologies of DVD.

Contents

This lawsuit is one of the many legal actions taken by the movie studios in an attempt to restrict the copying of DVDs.

Background

This case involves the digital media company RealNetworks, DVD Copy Control Association (DVD CCA) and the major motion picture studios. RealNetworks licensed the Content Scramble System (CSS), a technology commonly used on copyrighted DVDs to prevent unauthorized copying, from DVD CCA and released the product RealDVD that allows users to make hard drive copies of copyrighted DVDs. [1] However, some major movie studios feel that RealDVD can threaten the emerging market in digital downloads and encourage people to make copies of rental DVDs instead of purchasing. [2] [3] RealNetworks, on the other hand, believes that copying of DVD is now legal after the favorable ruling of a 2007 California Superior Court case against Kaleidescape, a manufacturer of high-end media servers capable of copying copyrighted DVD content to the servers. [1] [4] Therefore, RealNetworks sued the DVD CCA and several major movie studios on September 30, 2008 seeking for a declaratory judgment that RealDVD neither violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) 17 U.S.C.   § 1201 nor breached the licensing contract with DVD CCA. On the same day, the studios sued RealNetworks by alleging that RealNetworks violated the DMCA and breached the contract. [1]

District court ruling

The district court issued a temporary restraining order on October 3, 2008 after the initial hearing of the case to prevent the sale and distribution of RealDVD. The temporary restraining order was turned into a preliminary injunction against RealNetworks on August 11, 2009 by Judge Marilyn Hall Patel, barring the manufacturing and distribution of RealDVD or any other similar software product after the court found that RealNetworks violated the DMCA and breached the CSS licensing agreement with DVD CCA. [1] [5] [6]

DMCA claims on Content Scramble System

The DMCA prohibits circumvention of "effective" access control of copyrighted works and the trafficking of tools that are designed primarily to circumvent "effective" access control or copy control of copyrighted works. [7] RealNetworks alleged that that CSS is not effective anymore because it has been cracked or hacked. [8] [9] However, the court ruled that the DMCA statute does not require the access control or copy control technology to be strong as long as it prevents unauthorized access and/or copying under ordinary course of operation and with the authority of the copyright owner. Since the court concluded that CSS is still effective for ordinary uses, the DMCA claim against RealNetworks is valid. [1] [6]

The court decided that RealDVD is primarily designed or produced to circumvent CSS technology. In particular, the court found that the removal of crucial CSS technology in DVD drive-locking, secure storage of content keys on DVD, CSS authentication and CSS bus encryption during the playback of copied DVD content from the hard drive is a circumvention of CSS, even though they are not needed when playback from the hard drive. [6] The court further explained that even though RealNetworks is a licensee of CSS technology, it does not shield RealNetworks from DMCA claim because the removal of CSS technology is a violation of DMCA. [1]

DMCA claims on Sony ARccOS and Macrovision RipGuard

RealDVD also circumvented copy control measure in Sony ARccOS Protection and Macrovision RipGuard, which are designed not to impair normal playback but to prevent copying by inserting intentional bad sectors and fake menu structures to the DVDs, by mimicking the way human watches a DVD or by skipping the unreadable data. [1] [6] RealNetworks contended that Sony ARccOS and Macrovision RipGuard are not effective copy control measure because they only prolong the copying process. The district court rejected this argument because ARccOS and RipGuard may make copying take so long that copying is essentially not viable. RealNetworks then argued that ARccOS and RipGuard are never encountered during normal playback, leaving a back door to copying wide open, thus, they are not effective copy control measures. But the court disagreed with this argument because if this is the law, then "effective" copy protection measure will have to prevent against every possible current and future means of copying. Finally, RealNetworks asserted that regular DVD players can make temporary copies as cache, so ARccOS and RipGuard do not prevent copying. However, the court deemed this argument flawed by distinguishing that cache copies are byproduct of playback, but copies made by RealDVD are permanent. [1]

RealNetworks accused of evidence destruction

Before the March 16, 2009 hearing the DVD Copy Control Association, Inc. wrote to U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel that RealNetworks had destroyed critical pieces of evidence and that this had irrevocably damaged the integrity of the judicial process. The claim was that RealNetworks knew from the start that what they were producing had a high likelihood of resulting in legal action so the company took measures to cover its tracks along the way. The documentation of this released to the public was heavily redacted, however it indicated that RealNetworks intentionally eliminated engineering notebooks, code files, and documents that pointed to the fact that the RealDVD software was mainly produced by hackers. [10] [11]

Breach of license agreement

RealNetworks argued that it fully complied with the CSS license agreement not only by preserving all of the associated protection but also by adding Advanced Encryption System (AES) encryption to the copied content so that only the person who made the copy can play back the copied content with RealNetworks' player. However, the court decided that preserving the CSS protection only once during the initial playback of the DVD is not enough and any subsequent absence of CSS technology during the playback of copied DVD content from the hard drive is a contract violation. [1]

Antitrust claims

On May 14, 2009, RealNetworks amended the lawsuit to include antitrust claims against DVD CCA and the major studios, alleging that the delayed product launch of RealDVD, temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction are the results of DVD CCA and the movie studios conspiring to deny the licensing of CSS to make hard drive copies of DVD content. [5] [12] However, the court dismissed the claim because consumer can get the same hard drive copies through digital downloads, and some DVDs even come with an additional, non-CSS encrypted DVD that allows the users to copy the content onto the hard drive. Also, even if RealNetworks is able to obtain a license to circumvent CSS, RealNetworks still violated the DMCA for circumventing ARccOS and RipGuard. [12]

Subsequent development

In November 2009, RealNetworks filed an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, asking to remove the injunction on the sales of RealDVD. RealNetworks claimed that the district court applied an incorrect legal standard in granting a request by the major studios to halt sales of the software and was wrong to presume RealDVD would cause the film industry irreparable harm. [13] In March 2010, RealNetworks and DVD CCA reached a settlement in which RealNetworks agreed to the injunction against selling the RealDVD software and a payment of $4.5 million in legal cost to the studios. It would also refund the payments from the approximately 2,700 current users of RealDVD. [14]

Despite the defeat of DVD-copying tools in this and other court cases, many similar software, such as HandBrake which by itself only works with unprotected digital media, [15] continue to be free and widespread on the internet. Some believe that this indicates the ineffectiveness of the major studios' effort to restrict the copying of DVDs through legal rulings. [3] [16]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">DeCSS</span> Free open-source program to decode DVDs with encryption

DeCSS is one of the first free computer programs capable of decrypting content on a commercially produced DVD video disc. Before the release of DeCSS, free and open source operating systems could not play encrypted video DVDs.

The DVD Copy Control Association is an organization primarily responsible for the copy protection of DVDs. The Content Scramble System (CSS) was devised for this purpose to make copyright infringement difficult, but also presents obstacles to some legitimate uses of the media. The association is also responsible for the controversial Regional Playback Control (RPC), the region encoding scheme which gives movie studios geographic control over DVD distribution.

Ripping is the extraction of digital content from a container, such as a CD, onto a new digital location. Originally, the term meant to rip music from Commodore 64 games. Later, the term was applied to ripping WAV or MP3 files from digital audio CDs, and after that to the extraction of contents from any storage media, including DVD and Blu-ray discs, as well as the extraction of video game sprites.

Anti-circumvention refers to laws which prohibit the circumvention of technological barriers for using a digital good in certain ways which the rightsholders do not wish to allow. The requirement for anti-circumvention laws was globalized in 1996 with the creation of the World Intellectual Property Organization's Copyright Treaty.

<i>Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley</i> American legal case

Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley, 273 F.3d 429, was a court ruling at the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The ruling was the first significant test of the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">DVD Decrypter</span>

DVD Decrypter is a software application for Microsoft Windows that can create backup disk images of the DVD-Video structure of DVDs. It can be used to make a copy of any DVD protected with Content Scrambling System (CSS). The program can also record images to disc — functionality that the author has now incorporated into a separate product called ImgBurn. The software also allows a copy of a region-specific DVD to be made region free. It also removes Macrovision content protection, CSS, region codes, and user operation prohibition.

MacTheRipper is a Mac OS X application that enables users to create a playable copy of the contents of a Video DVD by defeating the Content Scramble System. During this process it may optionally modify or disable the DVD region code or the User operation prohibition features of the copied data. The previous lack of an OS X equivalent to the PC software DVDShrink gave this standalone DVD ripper widespread popularity among Macintosh users.

isoHunt Torrent index site closed 2013

isoHunt was an online torrent files index and repository, where visitors could browse, search, download or upload torrents of various digital content of mostly entertainment nature. The website was taken down in October 2013 as a result of a legal action from the MPAA; by the end of October 2013 however, two sites with content presumably mirrored from isohunt.com were reported in media. One of them – isohunt.to – became a de facto replacement of the original site. It is not associated in any way with the old staff or owners of the site, and is to be understood as a separate continuation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">FAIR USE Act</span>

The "Freedom and Innovation Revitalizing United States Entrepreneurship Act of 2007" was a proposed United States copyright law that would have amended Title 17 of the U.S. Code, including portions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to "promote innovation, to encourage the introduction of new technology, to enhance library preservation efforts, and to protect the fair use rights of consumers, and for other purposes." The bill would prevent courts from holding companies financially liable for copyright infringement stemming from the use of their hardware or software, and proposes six permanent circumvention exemptions to the DMCA.

DVD X Copy is a consumer software program that enabled novice computer users to copy any DVD movie to any blank DVD. Most commercial DVD movies include Content Scrambling System (CSS), a copy-protection technology designed to prevent DVD movies from being copied. This controversial DVD copy software program included technology that decrypts the CSS copy protection mechanism on DVD movie discs. DVD X Copy products are still being sold on the DVD X Copy website, although it was previously believed to be no longer sold or supported.

The Content Scramble System (CSS) is a digital rights management (DRM) and encryption system employed on many commercially produced DVD-Video discs. CSS utilizes a proprietary 40-bit stream cipher algorithm. The system was introduced around 1996 and was first compromised in 1999.

The WIPO Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Treaties Implementation Act, is a part of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a 1998 U.S. law. It has two major portions, Section 102, which implements the requirements of the WIPO Copyright Treaty, and Section 103, which arguably provides additional protection against the circumvention of copy prevention systems and prohibits the removal of copyright management information.

Digital rights management (DRM) is the management of legal access to digital content. Various tools or technological protection measures (TPM), such as access control technologies, can restrict the use of proprietary hardware and copyrighted works. DRM technologies govern the use, modification and distribution of copyrighted works and of systems that enforce these policies within devices. DRM technologies include licensing agreements and encryption.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Digital Millennium Copyright Act</span> United States copyright law

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a 1998 United States copyright law that implements two 1996 treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). It criminalizes production and dissemination of technology, devices, or services intended to circumvent measures that control access to copyrighted works. It also criminalizes the act of circumventing an access control, whether or not there is actual infringement of copyright itself. In addition, the DMCA heightens the penalties for copyright infringement on the Internet. Passed on October 12, 1998, by a unanimous vote in the United States Senate and signed into law by President Bill Clinton on October 28, 1998, the DMCA amended Title 17 of the United States Code to extend the reach of copyright, while limiting the liability of the providers of online services for copyright infringement by their users.

<i>MDY Industries, LLC v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.</i> Court case in the United States

MDY Industries, LLC v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc and Vivendi Games, Inc., 629 F.3d 928, is a case decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. At the district court level, MDY had been found liable under theories of copyright and tort law for selling software that contributed to the breach of Blizzard's End User License Agreement (EULA) and Terms of Use (ToU) governing the World of Warcraft video game software.
The court's ruling was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which reversed the district court in part, upheld in part, and remanded for further proceedings. The Court of Appeals ruled that for a software licensee's violation of a contract to constitute copyright infringement, there must be a nexus between the license condition and the licensor’s exclusive rights of copyright. However, the court also ruled, contrary to Chamberlain v. Skylink, that a finding of circumvention under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act does not require a nexus between circumvention and actual copyright infringement.

<i>Facebook, Inc. v. Power Ventures, Inc.</i> Lawsuit brought by Facebook in the United States

Facebook, Inc. v. Power Ventures, Inc. is a lawsuit brought by Facebook in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California alleging that Power Ventures Inc., a third-party platform, collected user information from Facebook and displayed it on their own website. Facebook claimed violations of the CAN-SPAM Act, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act ("CFAA"), and the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act. According to Facebook, Power Ventures Inc. made copies of Facebook's website during the process of extracting user information. Facebook argued that this process causes both direct and indirect copyright infringement. In addition, Facebook alleged this process constitutes a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"). Finally, Facebook also asserted claims of both state and federal trademark infringement, as well as a claim under California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL").

<i>DVD Copy Control Assn, Inc. v. Bunner</i>

DVD Copy Control Association, Inc. v. Bunner was a lawsuit that was filed by the DVD Copy Control Association in California, accusing Andrew Bunner and several others of misappropriation of trade secrets under California's implementation of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. The case went through several rounds of appeals and was last heard and decided in February 2004 by the California Court of Appeal for the Sixth District.

<i>DVD Copy Control Assn, Inc. v. Kaleidescape, Inc.</i>

DVD Copy Control Association, Inc. v. Kaleidescape, Inc., 176 Cal. App. 4th 697 is a legal case heard by the California Court of Appeal concerning breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. It discusses incorporation by reference regarding a supplemental document that was not part of the written license agreement between the parties. The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's judgment and ruled in favor of the plaintiff, finding that defendant was bound to the entire contract, including the supplemental document.

<i>321 Studios v. Metro Goldwyn Mayer Studios, Inc.</i>

321 Studios v. Metro Goldwyn Mayer Studios, Inc., 307 F. Supp. 2d 1085, is a district court case brought by 321 Studios seeking declaratory judgment from the court that their DVD ripping software, i.e. DVD Copy Plus and DVD X Copy do not violate the provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), or, in the alternative, that the DMCA is unconstitutional because Congress exceeded its enumerated powers, these provisions are unconstitutionally vague and/or violate the First Amendment.

<i>RealNetworks, Inc. v. Streambox, Inc.</i>

RealNetworks, Inc. v. Streambox, Inc., 2000 WL 127311, was a copyright law case of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, over the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and whether those provisions are violated by a service that enables Internet users to circumvent the copyright protection controls used by a streaming platform.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 RealNetworks, Inc. v. DVD Copy Control Association, Inc.,641 F. Supp. 2d 913, 2009 U.S. Dist. (N.D. Cal. August 11, 2009).
  2. ↑ Healey, Jon. MPAA vs. RealNetworks, The Los Angeles Times, September 30, 2008.
  3. 1 2 Von Lohmann, Fred.Why Hollywood Hates ReadDVD, Electronic Frontier Foundation, October 10, 2008.
  4. 1 2 DVD Copy Control Association, Inc. v. Kaleidescape, Inc.,176 Cal. App. 4th 697, 2009 Cal. App. (Cal. App. 4th August 12, 2009).
  5. 1 2 Stone, Brad. RealNetworks Barred From Selling DVD Copy Maker, The New York Times, August 11, 2009.
  6. 1 2 3 4 Hachman, Mark. RealNetworks Loses DVD Copying Decision, PC Magazine, August 11, 2009.
  7. ↑ 17 U.S.C.   § 1201
  8. ↑ Von Lohmann, Fred.Why MPAA Should Lose Against RealDVD, Electronic Frontier Foundation, October 2, 2008.
  9. ↑ Pegoraro, Rob.DVD-Copying Tools Lose in Court, Flourish in Real Life, The Washington Post, August 13, 2009.
  10. ↑ Kravets, David (March 5, 2009), "MPAA Claims RealNetworks 'Destroyed' Evidence in DVD Copying Case, Used Work of Hackers.", Wired, Wired News , retrieved November 23, 2013, Among other things, the studios allege in heavily redacted court documents that RealNetworks trashed a senior project manager's "engineering notebooks," an archive containing "actual code files" and other documents, one of which might reveal "Real's products are based in part on the work of … hackers."
  11. ↑ Cheng, Jacqui. (March 5, 2009), MPAA: RealNetworks hamstrings lawsuit by destroying evidence, Ars Technica, The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has accused RealNetworks of destroying evidence relevant to a lawsuit over the company's DVD-copying software. ... The MPAA claims that Real knew from the beginning that it would probably be sued—evidence that could be used to argue that Real knew it was doing something illegal—but has since deleted documents demonstrating that. Other documents, such as relevant code files, waffled between being "no longer in RealNetworks' possession" and being infected with a virus, according to the MPAA.
  12. 1 2 RealNetworks, Inc. v. DVD Copy Control Association, Inc,No. 3:2008cv04548(MHP), 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1433 (N.D. Cal. January 8, 2010).
  13. ↑ Sandoval, Greg. RealNetworks appeals injunction on RealDVD sales, Cnet News, November 10, 2008.
  14. ↑ Goel, Vindu. RealNetworks Drops Fight to Sell DVD Copying Software, The New York Times, March 3, 2010.
  15. ↑ "SupportFAQ - HandBrake - Trac". Archived from the original on January 11, 2008.
  16. ↑ Pegroraro, Rob. DVD-Copying Tools Lose in Court, Flourish in Real Life, The Washington Post, August 13, 2009.
  17. ↑ Kaplan, Carl S. DVD Case Will Test Reach of Digital Copyright Law, The New York Times, July 14, 2000.
  18. ↑ Patsuris, Penelope Hollywood Vs. Copycats, Round 2, Forbes, May 14, 2003.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.