Federal Judge Reinstates Injunction Against DVD-Copying Software Manufacturer 321 Studios
by Lauren Gelman, posted on April 7, 2004 - 2:36pm
On March 15, 2004, Judge Richard Owen of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York reinstated a preliminary injunction against software manufacturer 321 Studios (“321”). The March 3 injunction, which had been temporarily stayed by Judge Owen, bars 321 from manufacturing, selling, or promoting its DVD-copying software. The company is also barred from moving its assets without court approval. Paramount Pictures and Twentieth Century Fox had requested injunctive relief from the court, contending that 321, by selling software capable of circumventing DVD copy controls, was guilty of violating the anti-trafficking provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), 17 U.S.C. § 1201. 321 claimed that its software did not violate the act because it was not “primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing CSS” and had legitimate fair use purposes. The court rejected these arguments as well as 321’s constitutional challenges to the DMCA, citing Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes, 82 F.Supp.2d 211 (S.D.N.Y. 2000); Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes, 111 F.Supp.2d 294 (S.D.N.Y. 2000); and Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley, 273 F.3d 429 (2d Cir. 2001).
Colorado District Court Allows Challenge to Re-Copyrighting Public Domain Work Under § 514 of the URAA to Proceed
by Lauren Gelman, posted on April 7, 2004 - 2:35pm
Plaintiffs, consisting of performers and business owners who use public domain works in their professions, filed an amended complaint in April 2004 seeking declaratory and injunctive relief from the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 (CTEA) and § 514 of the Uruguay Round Agreement Act (URAA) for unconstitutionally removing literary and artistic works from the public domain. Section 514 of the URAA restored full copyright protection to all foreign works which had been exploited in the U.S. without authorization in the past because of failure to comply with U.S. formalities. Copyrights in eligible foreign works are restored automatically from the “date of restoration.” Since restoration is automatic, the owner of the restored copyright does not have to register this work. Because the URAA re-copyrighted many public domain movies, shows, and musical pieces, sale and performance of these art works became illegal.On March 15, 2004, the court denied the government’s motion to dismiss. While striking one claim pertaining to the CTEA, the court allowed the remaining three out of four counts of the complaint to proceed.
Prolonged Forensic Analysis of Seized Computer Hardware Does Not Violate Fourth Amendment
by Lauren Gelman, posted on April 7, 2004 - 2:33pm
In November 2001, a New Hampshire police department obtained a warrant to search the defendant Syphers’s apartment while investigating allegations that he had sexually assaulted three teenaged girls. In executing the warrant on November 5, 2001, the police seized a number of items, including the central processing unit (“CPU”) and other components of a desktop computer. Subsequently, on November 28, 2001, the state successfully obtained a warrant authorizing a search of the CPU, based on an application and sworn affidavit. The same day, the court allowed the state additional year to execute the search, on the ground that inspecting the CPU would require assistance from the state police, who were then faced with “an overwhelming backlog in similar computer crimes” and accordingly needed between nine and twelve months to complete the task. The application for additional time was not supported by a sworn affidavit.New Hampshire state police finished searching the CPU in June 2002, after spending seven months decoding the encryption which protected the file where the claimed pornographic images were allegedly discovered. Syphers was charged with and convicted of assault in a New Hampshire state court.