翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ Columbia National Wildlife Refuge ・ Columbia Non-neutral Torus ・ Columbia Olde Grey ・ Columbia Pacific University ・ Columbia Park ・ Columbia Park (Altoona) ・ Columbia Park (disambiguation) ・ Columbia Park (Kennewick, Washington) ・ Columbia Park (Portland, Oregon) ・ Columbia Park, Minneapolis ・ Columbia Park, Torrance, California ・ Columbia Peak ・ Columbia pebblesnail ・ Columbia Pictures ・ Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. v. Fung ・ Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. v. Redd Horne, Inc. ・ Columbia Pictures Television ・ Columbia Pike ・ Columbia Place ・ Columbia Plateau ・ Columbia Plateau (ecoregion) ・ Columbia Plateau Trail ・ Columbia Point ・ Columbia Point, Boston ・ Columbia Police Department (Missouri) ・ Columbia Political Review ・ Columbia Power Corporation ・ Columbia Public Library ・ Columbia Public Schools ・ Columbia Quadsquad Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. v. Redd Horne, Inc. ： ウィキペディア英語版 Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. v. Redd Horne, Inc. ''Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. v. Redd Horne, Inc.'', was a copyright infringement case of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit over the playing video cassettes in-store of a video sale and rental store. The appeals court affirmed the decision of the district court to grant the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and enjoin defendants from exhibiting plaintiffs' copyrighted motion pictures. ==Background== Maxwell's Video Showcase, Ltd. (Maxwell's) was a company that operated two video sale and rental stores in Erie, Pennsylvania. The stores had a small showroom area and showcase area. The showroom area contained video equipment and materials for sale or rental, but the showcase room, on the other hand, was used for patrons to view video contents in small booths with space for two to four people. The two stores had eighty-five booths in total. Customers who wanted to use the showcase facilities selected a film from a catalogue and the fee charged depended on the number of people in a viewing booth and the time of day. After they entered the booth, the motion picture of the selected film was transmitted to the viewing booth.〔 The defendants appealed from an injunctive order made by the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania to stop performing plaintiffs' copyrighted motion pictures. Also, they appealed from an award of damages against plaintiffs in the amount of $44,750.00.〔 It is important to note that this case was not about unauthorized taping or video cassette piracy. The defendants obtained the video cassette copies for viewing legally. The sale or rental of these cassettes to individuals for home viewing was also not at issue. Columbia Pictures did not contend that in-home use infringes their copyright. Instead, they argued that the exhibition or showing of the video cassettes in private booths constituted an unauthorized public performance. In turn, this violated Columbia Pictures' exclusive rights under federal copyright laws. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. v. Redd Horne, Inc.」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.