WPIX, Inc. v. Ivi, Inc.
691 F.3d 275
| 2d Cir. | 2012Background
- ivi began live Internet streaming of plaintiffs' copyrighted programming for profit without consent on Sept 13, 2010, expanding to more stations and programs by Feb 2011.
- ivi's service uses a paid TV player with optional recording features; content is encrypted during transmission and decrypted in small increments.
- Plaintiffs alleged ivi's Internet retransmission is not a cable system under §111, denying a compulsory license defense; ivi argued it is a cable system.
- District court granted a preliminary injunction based on likelihood of success, irreparable harm, balance of hardships, and public interest; SDNY order followed by appeal.
- Court applied Chevron steps to decide if Internet retransmission fits §111; Copyright Office's interpretation supported not extending §111 to Internet retransmissions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Internet retransmission fits §111 as a cable system | ivi is not a cable system under §111. | ivi is a cable system entitled to §111 license. | §111 does not extend to Internet retransmissions |
| Whether plaintiffs face irreparable harm without injunction | Harm to value and revenues cannot be fully remedied by money. | Damages could compensate after trial. | Irreparable harm established |
| Whether the balance of hardships favors injunction | Infringing service harms plaintiffs' business and bargaining position. | Injunctive relief harms ivi's business and has consequences. | Balance tipped in plaintiffs' favor |
| Whether public interest supports the injunction | Public access to programming supports broader availability. | Public interest in protecting copyright encourages creation and licensing. | Public interest not disserved by injunction |
Key Cases Cited
- EchoStar Satellite L.L.C. v. F.C.C., 457 F.3d 31 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (broadcast rights and exclusive rights under §106)
- Salinger v. Colting, 607 F.3d 68 (2d Cir. 2010) (preliminary injunction standards and public-interest considerations)
- eBay, Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., 547 U.S. 388 (U.S. 2006) (irreparable harm and injunction prerequisites enforcement)
- Cohen v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., 498 F.3d 111 (2d Cir. 2007) (statutory interpretation and Chevron framework guidance)
- Oman, 17 F.3d 344 (11th Cir. 1994) (cable‑system interpretation of §111 and headend concept)