Supreme Court refuses to clear way for cable companies to copy shows
The nation's high court asks the Justice Department to weigh in, delaying a decision in the case that could have a major impact on video-on-demand services.
The Supreme Court refused today to clear the way for cable TV companies to copy broadcasts for later viewing by their customers and instead asked the Justice Department to weigh in on whether this new video recording service would violate the Copyright Act.
The court's move will delay for months a final decision on the issue. Lawyers for the new Obama administration will be called to examine the legal question and then advise the court on their conclusion.
The case before the court could have wide impact in the emerging era of video on demand. In 1984, the Supreme Court cleared the way for the use of videocassette recorders when it ruled that home recording of movies by consumers did not violate the copyrights of the film studios.
Now, the cable TV companies want to go a step farther and make copies for their customers at their request.
Three years ago, the TV networks and film studios went to court in New York and sought to block Cablevision Systems Inc. from introducing its new video-recording service. Cablevision did not plan to pay a licensing fee to make the extra copies of the TV shows.
Lawyers for the TV networks and film studios said this copying violated federal law. The Copyright Act says that those who make and produce copyrighted material have "the exclusive rights" to profit from it.
A federal judge in 2006 ruled for the TV networks and halted Cablevision's plans. Last year, however, the U.S. appeals court in New York reversed that ruling and said the copying was in the control of the subscribers -- not Cablevision -- and was more akin to a home videocassette recorder.
In October, the networks and studios asked the Supreme Court to take up the issue. They said the case could be the most important ruling on copyright law since the 1984 decision in the case of the Sony video recorder.
Today, the court issued a one-line order in the case saying the solicitor general "is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States."
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito said they took no part in this decision, apparently because they own stock in the affected companies.
If the solicitor general advises the court to take up the issue, the case would not be heard until the fall.
The case is Cable News Network vs. CSC Holdings.
In a second closely watched business case, the justices cleared the way for consumers in California and elsewhere to sue grocery stores for violating federal food-labeling laws.
Usually, the Food and Drug Administration enforces these laws. However, several consumers in California sued grocery stores there, alleging the stores had not disclosed that farm-raised salmon were being served special nutrients to give them a pinkish color.
Over the objections of the major supermarket chains, the California Supreme Court allowed the suit to proceed.
The supermarket chains appealed to the Supreme Court and argued that the law makes clear the FDA has the authority to enforce the food-labeling law, not private plaintiffs who file lawsuits.
The court turned down the appeal today in Albertsons vs. Kanter and allowed the suit to go forward.
david.savage@latimes.com
