AfterDawn: News

Zediva countersues MPAA

In April, the MPAA surprised no one by filing a copyright infringement suit against streaming site Zediva, claiming the site does not have proper licenses from the studios.

Zediva launched in January and has become very popular because it streams new releases and does not have delay windows like Netflix and Redbox do for physical discs.



The company "rents" users a DVD player and DVD and allows them to control it via online streaming, for the cheap price of $2.

Today, Zediva has countersued the MPAA whilst demanding a judge sanction.

Zediva has claimed it does not need licenses because it is just "like" a brick-and-mortar rental company. When a customer rents a DVD, it takes it out of circulation, and does not create any digital copies.

Reads the countersuit (via Wired):

The only difference between watching a rented DVD on the DVD player in one’s living room and watching a rented DVD using Zediva is that rather than connecting to the DVD player with a short cable, Zediva lets users connect to the DVD player over the internet.

Written by: Andre Yoskowitz @ 20 May 2011 22:27

• Previous article

• Apple all set to launch iTunes Cloud service

• Next article

• Google halts its newspaper digitization operations

• 3 comments

• KSib

  I was always kind of wondering why someone hasn't done this and here it is. I hope they win if what they're doing is within the bounds of the law or rather within reason. I want this type of service to be a reality, but at the same time, it's gonna suck for those brick and mortar video store workers.
  
  A rental is a rental assuming that each of the DVDs that are being streamed are purchased and no more than the number purchased are being streamed, otherwise they would need a license, right? Because they are making copies and distributing them without permission. They would have to prove that in court.
  

  20.5.2011 23:51 #1

• blueboy09

  Originally posted by KSib: I was always kind of wondering why someone hasn't done this and here it is. I hope they win if what they're doing is within the bounds of the law or rather within reason. I want this type of service to be a reality, but at the same time, it's gonna suck for those brick and mortar video store workers.
  
  A rental is a rental assuming that each of the DVDs that are being streamed are purchased and no more than the number purchased are being streamed, otherwise they would need a license, right? Because they are making copies and distributing them without permission. They would have to prove that in court. Or maybe their just afraid that they would lose 'potential' customers (MPAA) and threaten to take them (Zediva) down where it hurts the most? I mean it's not like MPAA is hurting for money to pay their greedy lawyers now, is it?
  

  Chance prepares the favored mind. Look up once in a while and you might learn something. - BLUEBOY

  21.5.2011 22:58 #2

• stk33 (unverified)

  But doing it over the internet is exactly what makes it streaming and digital copy - the latter because once it's downloaded by the software, at some point the copy of the movie does exist on the customer's computer's hard drive, and all MPAA needs to do is to demonstrate it. The license on the regular DVD is exactly for playing it in your own living room, and strictly speaking, even when you stream it to another room within your own home, it's already a copyright violation, and if one day MPAA decided to go after the enablers of this, it would most likely win.

  23.5.2011 10:12 #3