by Guest Fri 13 Sep 2013 - 23:10
nothing happened
n a statement, Fox said, “We are pleased, but not surprised, that that the court recognized that the commercial retransmission of our broadcast signal without permission or compensation is a clear violation of the law. This decision should finally put the matter to rest, and will hopefully discourage other illegal services from attempting to steal our content.”
"[T]he Copyright Act and, in particular, the Transmit Clause are clear: 'FilmOn X transmits (i.e., communicates from mini-antenna through servers over the Internet to a user) the performance (i.e., an original over-the-air broadcast of a work copyrighted by one of the Plaintiffs) to members of the public (i.e., any person who accesses the FilmOn X service through its website or application) who receive the performance in separate places and at different times (i.e., at home at their computers or on their mobile devices)
U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer refused FilmOn X’s request to set aside an injunction as it pursues an appeal or to roll back the scope of her order prohibiting the company from offering the unauthorized broadcast station feeds in almost the entire U.S. Last week, Collyer ruled that the offerings of FilmOn X’s D.C. service were public performances in violation of the Copyright Act, and she extended an injunction not just in the nation’s capital but in all other jurisdictions save New York.
That’s three legal losses in a row for FilmOn X in a week. Today the D.C. District Court denied emergency stay motions by the company and its CEO Alki David against an almost nationwide injunction from a case launched by Fox Television Stations, ABC and NBC. The free-TV-over-the-Internet company was trying to stop the September 5 ordered preliminary injunction from taking effect, to have it modified it so that it covered only the court’s direct jurisdiction and to increase the amount of the bond form $250,000 to 2.75 million. The judge said No all round. “FilmOn X’s arguments are not persuasive.
The judge also ruled that the company and the billionaire digital media entrepreneur had to take down, as agreed in the July 2012 settlement, sites likewww.cbsyousuck.com and remove other online material slagging and attacking the broadcaster.
“FilmOn and David are hereby ordered to forthwith deliver to plaintiffs’ counsel the sum of $1,350,000, plus interest at the statutory rate, the costs of collection, and reasonable attorneys’ fees,”
SINGING IN THE SHOWER
"The only type of performance that is enabled by FilmOn X is private,” said FilmOn X laywer Ryan Baker.
But content creators aren't buying it.
“When someone inserts themselves as a middleman and tries to make a profit,licenses should be obtained,” Robert Garrett, a lawyer for Comcast Corp.’s NBC, told the judges. “Singing in the shower is a private performance. Sending transmissions to 50,000 customers is not singing in the shower.”
Last edited by TVTenerife on Sat 14 Sep 2013 - 21:49; edited 2 times in total
Our complaint filed today underscores our commitment to vigorously protect our copyrighted programming from illegal appropriation by opportunistic pirates
