A student-run resource for reliable reports on the latest law and technology news

Ninth Circuit Allows Individuals to Use Devices to Decrypt Satellite Television Signals

By Nick Bramble — Edited by Wen Bu

DirecTV, Inc. v. Huynh
Ninth Circuit, No. 05-16361, September 11, 2007
Slip Opinion

Faced with the question of how to resolve a provision of the Federal Communications Act banning the assembly and modification of devices primarily designed for the unauthorized decryption of satellite signals, the Ninth Circuit held on September 11 that this provision applies only to “assemblers, manufacturers, and distributors of piracy devices” and not individual end users of such devices.

Jennifer Granick expects that the ruling will “prevent[] satellite and cable TV companies from piling on excessive damages that would punish and chill legitimate encryption research.”
Declan McCullagh discusses the various legal and illegal uses of the smart card devices purchased by defendants.

DirecTV argued that the FCA provision should sweep more broadly and cover all people who modify devices (“smart cards”) designed to intercept satellite signals, regardless of their intent and whether interception actually occurred. On DirecTV’s reading, the provision would have encompassed any person who inserted a pirated access card into a receiver, on DirecTV’s theory that this person had thereby “assembled” the device. Defendants responded that such a broad interpretation of the FCA would criminalize security and computer science research into satellite technology, and would effectively render it illegal to purchase smart card programmers.

The Ninth Circuit largely agreed with defendants, affirming the district court’s refusal to grant default judgments that would have required defendants to pay up to $100,000 in statutory damages per violation. The court also rejected DirecTV’s broad interpretation of the FCA and upheld a distinction between those who illegally intercept satellite signals and those who manufacture, assemble, or modify devices to enable others to do so. It is still possible that defendants will be found liable for copyright or lesser statutory violations.

Posted On Nov - 15 - 2007 Comments Off

Comments are closed.

  • RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • GooglePlay
Photo By: Robert Scoble - CC BY 2.0

Mississippi Attorney

Judge Wingate found a substantial likelihood that Google would prevail ...

Unknown

Federal Circuit Flas

Court Agrees with USPTO: Settlement Agreements Are Not Grounds for ...

Photo By: darkuncle - CC BY 2.0

Pass the Patented Pe

The specific interpretative issue in both Tomato II and Broccoli ...

th

Stephen Hawking™:

While this is possible, the types of products/services Hawking has ...

Unknown

Flash Digest: News i

New Senate Cyberbill Measure to Protect Americans from Cybercrime Chairman ...