[go: nahoru, domu]

Jump to content

Redbox Automated Retail LLC v. Universal City Studios LLLP: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Arctixfox (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Arctixfox (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
'''[[Redbox]] Automated Retail LLC v. [[Universal City Studios]] LLLP''', Dist. Court, D. Delaware 2009 was a case before [[Robert B. Kugler]] concerning copyright misuse, antitrust, and tortious interference with contract.
'''[[Redbox]] Automated Retail LLC v. [[Universal City Studios]] LLLP''', Dist. Court, D. Delaware 2009 was a case before [[Robert B. Kugler]] concerning copyright misuse, antitrust, and tortious interference with contract.

Redbox sued Universal on counts of copyright misuse, antitrust, and tortious interference with contract when Universal pressured Redbox to accept an agreement to only obtain titles from them after 45 days of initial DVD release. Universal pressured Redbox's distributors to stop providing titles to Redbox if Redbox did not accept this agreement. Universal did this to protect their profits, but since Redbox makes a majority of their profits within two weeks of DVD release, Redbox did not accept.

The court dismissed Redbox's copyright misuse and tortious interference with contract claims, but allowed the antitrust count to move forward.


==Background==
==Background==

Revision as of 22:04, 12 October 2012

Redbox Automated Retail LLC v. Universal City Studios LLLP, Dist. Court, D. Delaware 2009 was a case before Robert B. Kugler concerning copyright misuse, antitrust, and tortious interference with contract.

Redbox sued Universal on counts of copyright misuse, antitrust, and tortious interference with contract when Universal pressured Redbox to accept an agreement to only obtain titles from them after 45 days of initial DVD release. Universal pressured Redbox's distributors to stop providing titles to Redbox if Redbox did not accept this agreement. Universal did this to protect their profits, but since Redbox makes a majority of their profits within two weeks of DVD release, Redbox did not accept.

The court dismissed Redbox's copyright misuse and tortious interference with contract claims, but allowed the antitrust count to move forward.

Background

Redbox is a company that rents DVDs through automated retail kiosks inside major grocery stores, fast food restaurants, convenience stores, and pharmacies. Universal Studios is a major movie studio that produces many of the titles that Redbox rents. Universal was concerned that DVD kiosks jeopardize their profits from DVD sales and rentals, so they pressured VPD and Ingram, two of Redbox's major film distributors, to stop distributing to Redbox unless Redbox agrees to obtain DVDs directly from Universal, and only after 45 days of initial DVD release. Since Redbox makes most of their revenue from new release DVDs in the first two weeks, Redbox did not agree to this.

Opinion of the Court

Subsequent developments

See also

References

See bibliography