ASU | NEW AMERICA | SLATE
FUTURE TENSE
Learn more
about Future
Tense »
THE CITIZEN'S GUIDE TO THE FUTURE
JAN. 17 2014 9:03 AM
It's the 30th Anniversary of the Supreme Court's Monumental Decision About
Betamax
By Robert S. Schwartz
Cable TV tuner box, Betamax player (with wired remote), turntable, RCA select-a-vision
video disc player, 8 track player, receiver, around 1987.
Photo courtesy Alan Light/Flickr
Those who came of age in the Internet era may not know that they owe their ability to go online to a court decision 30 years ago today
about a mechanically intricate analog tape recorder. In 1983 and 1984, I and several other young lawyers for the electronics and
entertainment industries sat on the floor of a Supreme Court hallway every week to see if the court’s opinion in the Sony Betamax case
would be released. We all knew the outcome would be very important. But we didn’t imagine what a turning point it would be.
Commercial audio recording was common for most of the 20th century—home audio recording became feasible in the 1950s and
common in the 1960s. Video recording, however, required much greater storage capacity. It became possible when Ray Dolby and his
colleagues at Ampex Corp. mounted magnetic recording heads on a wheel rotating at an angle to a synchronized moving tape.
Engineers from Japan’s consumer electronics industry reduced the size and cost of video recorders until a cassette model could be built
into a TV console. In 1976 Sony Corp. introduced the Betamax home VCR, with a broadcast tuner and programmable clock. For the first
time, consumers could watch audiovisual entertainment at a time and place not chosen by the content owner or distributor.
Sony Betamax player.
Photo courtesy hcalderonmeister/Flickr
Help us hold Trump accountable. Join Slate Plus now.
Advertisement
In response, Universal and Disney studios sued Sony for “contributory” copyright infringement. They admitted that selling a Betamax
recorder did not directly infringe their rights but claimed it “contributed” to infringement by consumers, who could now record shows,
movies, and sporting events. Judge Warren Ferguson of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, based on testimony
(including from children’s TV host Fred Rogers, who said he welcomed home recording of his shows) and usage surveys, declined to ban
the Betamax. He said nothing in the law required an injunction against the sale of a “staple article of commerce” that could be put to
both infringing and non-infringing uses. But the appellate court held in favor of the studios. It instructed the trial court to grant the
studio’s request for an injunction against the sale of home VCRs.
U.S. law allows successful copyright plaintiffs to choose “statutory damage” awards of up to $150,000 per work infringed. By choosing
to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, rather than acquiesce and seek a “license” from the entertainment industry to sell VCRs to
consumers, Sony faced serious financial risk. Millions of devices, recording thousands of copyrighted works, could have produced
statutory damages in excess of Sony’s capitalization. But Sony did appeal. And after two oral arguments and intense internal debate, the
Supreme Court held by a vote of five to four that it is legal to sell a video recorder to a consumer.
In his opinion for the majority Justice John Paul Stevens built twin foundations on which today’s consumer rights now rest. First,
personal home recording and storage of an entire copyrighted work can be a lawful “fair use” of the work. Second, selling a product
that has substantial non-infringing uses is lawful, even though it is commonly used to infringe. To rule otherwise, the court majority
said, would be to enlarge the rights granted to copyright owners, so as to allow anyone whose work might be copied to effectively to
control the right of technical innovators to market their own inventions. This, the court said, would “block the wheels of commerce.”
Without these twin protections for consumers and innovators, we could not today buy most consumer digital products or log on to
most online services that search for, store, and respond to copyrighted information. All online services, as well as digital devices like
DVRs, smartphones, and tablets, must routinely store and display copyrighted information and programming based on consumer
searches and requests. Most do not or cannot require advance permission. The Internet itself would have remained a closed circuit
primarily for government, educational, and industrial use. There would be no social networks.
The court’s decision in the Betamax case, however, was only one front of a war that the litigation touched off, which continues today.
The movie industry immediately pushed for legislation to require studio permission for home rental of prerecorded movies, and for a
copyright “levy” (now common outside the United States) of up to $50 per device and $5 per blank tape. More recently the
entertainment industry has looked to international treaties, such as the secret Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. Plaintiffs can
pursue ruinous statutory damages. According to Jason Mazzone in his book Copyfraud, threats of suit keep new products and services
off the market even when the innovator is confident that they are lawful. Recently for example, online services have been sued for
reporting “hot news” too “soon” after it was originally reported by someone else.
From the moment Justice Stevens read the majority opinion aloud, through the SOPA and PIPA bills, to this year’s congressional
hearings on “copyright reform,” the attack on Betamax continues. Today, 30 years later, is a good time read all of Sony Corporation of
America v. Universal City Studios Inc. Then send a copy to your representatives in Congress. Ask them not to screw it up.
Future Tense is a partnership of Slate, New America, and Arizona State University.
DOUBLEX
WHAT WOMEN REALLY THINK.
DEC. 15 2016 12:56 PM
What the Women of SCOTUS Know
In these troubled times, Justices O’Connor, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan are all the role models we need.
By Dahlia Lithwick
Help us hold Trump accountable. Join Slate Plus now.