transmission, etc.-thought it had guarded the statute against ossification and obsolescence via technology-neutral defaults.These defaults appear in the 1976 Act's provisions on subject matter, 2 rights, 3 and statutory definitions. 4 Copyright control was thus supposed to turn on relevant circumstances, not technicalities.That is, with the exception of numerous technologyspecific carveouts, 5 copyright's subject matter and scope would apply broadly and evenly to all technologies, even those that did not exist.Copyright law would be technology neutral.Yet, disputes continue.Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a retransmission company, Aereo, violated
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brad A. Greenberg (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: