|
|
|
|
|
by rayiner
2949 days ago
|
|
Note that the article takes Breyer's question about phonograph record stores way out of context: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcr... (page 6). Breyer asked: > If we take the public performance, maybe we run into what Professor Nimmer saw as a problem. Why isn't what used to be called a phonograph record store that sells phonograph records to 10,000 customers giving a public performance? The bit about "phonograph record stores" is actually referencing a hypothetical posed by Prof. Nimmer in a 1982 textbook, which addressed the 1976 Copyright Act amendments at issue in the Aereo case. That hypothetical came up in an amicus brief to the court: https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/sup... (at 7-8). Breyer is talking about phonographs because that hypothetical references phonographs (and everyone is trying to understand what Congress meant in 1976). Note that a few pages later, Justice Sotomayor asks the attorney to extend the hypothetical to Dropbox and iCloud. |
|