Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that both object and source code qualify as speech but that regulations thereof are content neutral so long as they target only functional “nonspeech elements”
• holding that Content Scramble System (“CSS”) encryption, a technology protecting motion pictures on DVDs through an algorithm scheme configured by a set of “keys,” constituted an access control
• explaining that Congress passed the DMCA’s anti-trafficking provisions to help copyright owners protect their works from piracy behind a digital wall
• noting that an amicus brief can be helpful in elaborating issues properly presented by the parties
• noting that in the modern age, this Court has taken \an `evolutionary' approach . . . favoring `narrow' holdings that would permit the law to mature on a `case-by-case' basis\
• observing that section 1201(a)(3)(A) “exempts from liability those who would ‘decrypt’ an encrypted DVD with the authority of a copyright owner, not those who would ‘view’ a DVD with the authority of a copyright owner”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).