A group of four leading high tech trade associations filed an amici brief in the case of Paramount Pictures Corp. versus Replay TV, Inc. et al. The friend of the court brief criticizes a California district court order that requires Replay TV to track the viewing behavior of its customers.

In the brief, the Association for Competitive Technology (ACT), Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), Consumer Electronics Association (CEA), and Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) claim that the judge's order establishes a harmful "principle of judicial intervention in technology design."

In an April order, a Los Angeles judge required SONICblue, the maker of ReplayTV, to gather data about how customers use their hardware devices to copy and store televised works, omit commercials from television programs, and share programs with others. In addition, the judge ordered the interactive television companies to create and distribute new software for this purpose.

On May 3, another judge ordered SONICblue to reveal the individual viewing habits of its ReplayTV 4000 customers and pinpoint the frequency with which movie and television shows are recorded and electronically shared with other users.

"The uncertainty and chilling effect created by the Court's order pose serious long-term risks for the development of new technology products and the innovation of new technology," the brief notes, adding, "...the principles embodied in the Magistrate Judge's order would, if adopted elsewhere, discourage technological innovation, seriously harm the developers of new technology, and reduce consumer choice."

Television and motion picture studios claim the ReplayTV 4000, SONICblue's most popular digital video recorder to date, enables copyright infringement by allowing users to send files via a 'Send Show' feature over the Internet and redistribute entertainment content without permission from copyright holders.

On Wednesday, Judge Florence-Marie Cooper granted the Santa Clara, Calif.-based SONICblue's request for a stay of the April 26 ruling. The stay will last until at least June 3, when the Judge will hear SONICblue's request to vacate the ruling.

"This case reflects an attempt by movie studios and television networks to force technology companies to monitor, and eventually even control, the way consumers use technologies. The case reflects the collision between the old mass market media in which consumers passively receive a limited entertainment choices and the newer, more interactive world in which users exercise more control over a wider variety of choices." said Harris Miller, president of the Arlington, Va.-based ITAA.

LATEST NEWS

UCSD Plans First Flash-Based Supercomputer
Digging Into N.Y.'s Antitrust Suit Against Intel
Analyst: Sony-Ericsson's Android Bid Is Late
Coupon Site Targets Black Friday, Cyber Monday
Microsoft Sites Up Big in Time Spent Online

Added Jonathan Zuck, president of the Association for Competitive Technology, "When the courts take on the role of software engineer, software engineers and consumers need to start worrying. Not only is the potential for unintended consequences extremely high, but the decision also sets dangerous precedents. In a time when consumer 'trust' is central to industry success, forcing companies to abandon their contracts with consumers could be catastrophic."

Zuck noted that such court-ordered redesign could "effectively bankrupt" smaller technology companies with limited resources.

A copy of the brief is available on the web at http://www.itaa.org/isec/itaa051402.pdf.