Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley

Corley, also known as the "DeCSS case," was a highly publicized lawsuit that involved the controversial distribution of software code that enabled the circumvention of DVD copy protection measures.

Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley, also known as the "DeCSS case," was a highly publicized lawsuit that involved the controversial distribution of software code that enabled the circumvention of DVD copy protection measures. This case is significant in the realm of intellectual property law and copyright infringement.

The origins of the lawsuit can be traced back to 1999 when a Norwegian teenager named Jon Johansen, also known as "DVD Jon," created a software program called DeCSS. This program allowed users to circumvent the copy protection measures on DVDs, enabling them to make copies of movies and distribute them freely.

In 2000, a group of individuals led by Eric Corley, who published an online magazine called 2600: The Hacker Quarterly, distributed copies of DeCSS on their website. This distribution led to a lawsuit filed by Universal City Studios, the parent company of several major movie studios, claiming that the distribution of DeCSS violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

The DMCA, which was passed in 1998, makes it illegal to circumvent technological measures used to protect copyrighted works, as well as to manufacture or distribute technology that can circumvent these measures. Universal argued that the distribution of DeCSS was a violation of the DMCA since it enabled the circumvention of copy protection measures on DVDs.

Corley and his co-defendants argued that the distribution of DeCSS was protected by the First Amendment and that they were not violating the DMCA since the code was not a device or technology designed to circumvent copy protection measures, but rather a form of expressive speech.

The case was heard in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in 2000. The court issued a preliminary injunction against the distribution of DeCSS, finding that it violated the DMCA. The court also rejected the defendants' First Amendment argument, stating that the distribution of DeCSS was not protected speech because it was primarily intended to facilitate copyright infringement.

The defendants appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In 2001, the appellate court upheld the district court's decision, stating that the distribution of DeCSS was not protected speech and that it violated the DMCA.

The DeCSS case was significant because it was one of the first major legal battles over the DMCA and its impact on free speech and copyright law. It also highlighted the ongoing debate over the balance between intellectual property rights and the First Amendment.

The DeCSS case remains relevant today, as similar legal battles continue to be fought over the use of technology to circumvent copy protection measures and the scope of protection for free speech in the digital age.