10,938
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
====?====
;1984 - Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.
:'''Action:''' Sony Corp. of America (defendant) was sued by Universal City Studios, Inc. (plaintiff)
:'''Reason:''' Copyright infringement. Universal claimed that Sony's Betamax VCRs facilitated copyright infringement by allowing users to record and copy their copyrighted television broadcasts.
:'''Outcome:''' The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Sony, establishing the following:
:*Non-infringing use: The Betamax VCR was not inherently infringing, as it had substantial non-infringing uses, such as timeshifting (recording programs to watch later).
:*Contributory infringement: The Court did not establish a strict standard for contributory infringement, but held that Sony could not be held liable for the infringing actions of its customers.
;Additional Information:
:*This case had a significant impact on the development of home video recording technology and the legal landscape surrounding copyright and new technologies.
:*The concept of "fair use" was not directly addressed in this case, but the Court's emphasis on non-infringing uses laid the groundwork for future fair use arguments related to new technologies.
:*While not directly about emulation, this case set a precedent regarding the potential liability of technology companies for the actions of their users, which has indirect implications for emulation and the legal discussion around emulators and copyright infringement.
no edit summary
===Sony===
====Direct legal action====
;1999 - Bleem! (PS1) vs. Sony
Quite infamously, Apple hires anyone behind a promising iPhone emulator or compatibility layer, and it almost always gets shut down and scrubbed off the face of the Internet.
==Not directly about emulation==
===Apple===
;1983 - Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin Computer Corp.
:'''Action:''' Apple Computer, Inc. sued Franklin Computer Corp.
:*The court's definition of fair use remains influential in software copyright cases today.
:*Although not directly related to emulation, this case set a precedent that indirectly affects emulation by clarifying the legal boundaries of software compatibility and copyright protection, which are relevant to the creation and distribution of emulators.
===Sony===
;1984 - Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.
:'''Action:''' Sony Corp. of America (defendant) was sued by Universal City Studios, Inc. (plaintiff)
:'''Reason:''' Copyright infringement. Universal claimed that Sony's Betamax VCRs facilitated copyright infringement by allowing users to record and copy their copyrighted television broadcasts.
:'''Outcome:''' The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Sony, establishing the following:
:*Non-infringing use: The Betamax VCR was not inherently infringing, as it had substantial non-infringing uses, such as timeshifting (recording programs to watch later).
:*Contributory infringement: The Court did not establish a strict standard for contributory infringement, but held that Sony could not be held liable for the infringing actions of its customers.
;Additional Information:
:*This case had a significant impact on the development of home video recording technology and the legal landscape surrounding copyright and new technologies.
:*The concept of "fair use" was not directly addressed in this case, but the Court's emphasis on non-infringing uses laid the groundwork for future fair use arguments related to new technologies.
:*While not directly about emulation, this case set a precedent regarding the potential liability of technology companies for the actions of their users, which has indirect implications for emulation and the legal discussion around emulators and copyright infringement.
