Sony Vs Universal City Case Study

“One may search the Copyright Act in vain for any sign that it is unlawful to copy a program for later home viewing.” Writes Justice John Pual Stevens in the majority opinion for Sony v. Universal City Studios. He went on to say the recording of programs for later viewing, or time-shifting, “Merely enables a viewer to see such a work which (they) had been invited to witness...” The 5-4 ruling was the beginning of a complete transformation of the video industry. A new kind of viewer slowly started to arise, they began to have more control over what they watch, and when and where they watch it. It also stared many changes in the video industry, forcing it to create new ways of telling engaging complex stories to a smarter audience, and find new revenue streams to make up for lost ad revenue. However these changes are not all positive. The major networks and advertisers are slow to change and are trying to force things to stay the same. And a new growing reliance on meta-data could lead to a different kind of stagnation in what is available to viewers. The couch potato, dead …show more content…
If viewers click to skip the ad the advertiser doesn't pay.” As well as revenue sharing with YouTube pasterns who elect to use the new channel subscription option. While channel operators and MCNs turn to crowd funding sites like Kickstarter and Patrion to raise the money to produce their content. Leslic Moonves CEO of CBS Corporation is untroubled by the competition, “For twenty-five years I've been hearing that network television is dead. We're thriving like never before.” CBS is the top ranked network in the prime time television. At the time of writing their stock is almost 55 dollars a share (Netflix is 348 dollars a share).

Moonves Insist that advertisers need a mass audience to introduce products an audience “only broadcast networks can deliver