DOCSLIB.ORG

Bittorrent, Grokster , and Why Entertainment and Internet Lawyers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bittorrent, Grokster , and Why Entertainment and Internet Lawyers JOURNAL OF VOLUME 10 NUMBER 11 INTERNET LAW MAY 2007 EDITED BY DLA PIPER RUDNICK GRAY CARY BitTorrent, Grokster, and Why Entertainment and Internet Lawyers Need to Prepare for the Fair Use Argument for Downloading TV Shows By Charles B. Vincent If a man has good corn, or wood, or boards, or pigs, satellite signal. The ability to watch digital versions of to sell, or can make better chairs or knives, cru- television shows and movies on one’s computer is merely cibles, or church organs, than anybody else, you the next step on the evolutionary visual media ladder. 3 will find a broad, hard-beaten road to his house, As the means to obtain these files through software or though it be in the woods. online distributors continue to improve in their efficiency —Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1855 1 and availability, the copyright holders of these works will Continued on page 7 he Emerson quote has been paraphrased and morphed over time into its better-known pithier counterpart: Build a better mousetrap, and the world will beat a IN THIS ISSUE T 2 path to your door. Modern computer technology BITTORRENT, GROKSTER, AND WHY has not diminished the applicability of Emerson’s simple ENTERTAINMENT AND INTERNET LAWYERS observation. In the music industry, consumers initially NEED TO PREPARE FOR THE FAIR USE ARGUMENT FOR DOWNLOADING TV SHOWS . 1 purchased vinyl LPs, progressed toward cassettes, and By Charles B. Vincent recently turned to compact discs before the digital sound file emerged as the modern way of listening to music. HOW WELL DO YOU KNOW YOUR INTERNET MARKETING PARTNERS? . 3 Likewise, many watched television by adjusting their By Tom Hughes antennas long before anyone began paying for a cable or INTERNET LAW IN THE COURTS . 20 By Evan Brown DEVELOPMENTS IN INTERNET LAW—EUROPE . 24 Charles B. Vincent received a JD from Widener University School of Law By Patrick Van Eecke and Maarten Truyens in 2007. Mr. Vincent externed as the Wolcott Fellow for Vice Chancellor Donald F. Parsons, Jr., in the Delaware Court of Chancery in 2006-07 and will serve as a clerk for Justice Henry duPont Ridgely in the Delaware Supreme Court in 2007-08. While at Widener, Mr. Vincent was one of the Articles Editors for Volume 32 of The Delaware Journal of Corporate Law . The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Amy Yeung, Thomas Uebler, and Josh Meyeroff for their helpful comments. Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=979741 May 2007 JOURNAL OF INTERNET LAW BitTorrent, Grokster, and Why Entertainment and or her high-speed internet connection and cable service, Internet Lawyers Need to Prepare for the Fair Use the fact that cable and premium shows are not “free” in Argument for Downloading TV Shows the sense that the user has to pay for the subscription may Continued from page 1 alter the fair use analysis presented. Where appropriate, however, this article will distinguish this point. continue enforcing their copyright through litigation. For This article presumes that anybody with access to a the copyright holders of television shows, however, the high-speed Internet connection can obtain, with minimal path to protecting the creative work may not be as well- effort, the software necessary to download large files, such as beaten as one may hope. copies of television shows or movies, which can be watched Downloading media through the Internet is now com- and stored on one’s computer. The next section of this arti- monplace. 4 Due to the rapid development of technological cle provides a brief overview of torrent technology, which is infrastructure, however, torrent downloading technology the current and most prolific downloading method used to has abruptly decreased the time required for one to obtain obtain large files today. Because the Supreme Court’s 2005 large media files. As a result, downloading such files has decision in Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, gone from impractical to commonplace, and “television Ltd. 11 has solidified certain obligations on behalf of these shows [now] represent the fastest-growing type of files types of distributors in the context of confronting the digital downloaded online.”5 For example, in 2005, one television music piracy problem, this article explores these obligations fan admitted that it took him seven hours to download and its implications on the purveyors of torrent technology. an hour-long episode of a recent season finale that he had The next part of this article assesses the fair use doctrine as missed using his high-speed Internet connection and the it may apply to those programs that facilitate distribution “latest file-sharing software.” 6 In 2006, Apple’s iTunes’ of digital copies of broadcast television show (referred to Web site stated that a comparable 45-minute show would as distributors) and the end users 12 who download them. take 15-20 minutes to download with a high-speed Internet Because of the nature of broadcast television, litigation connection. 7 Other Web sites simply host the video and against the peer-to-peer downloading programs may be suc- stream the content in sections, allowing the user to watch it cessful for the reasons explained, whereas litigation against without downloading, which would yield practically instan- the end users may be distinguishable from the programs taneous viewing gratification. 8 As the technology contin- and prove to become futile. Some practical considerations ues to improve, copyright holders for these shows should be and litigation strategies are explored in the article, and it concerned about rising levels of potential infringement. concludes with the hope that these copyright holders will One outcome, however, is clear: People now consume use the online television consumer base to develop a more digital American television in mass quantities. 9 While marketable and profitable product. the original peer-to-peer downloading programs, such as the all-familiar Napster, were found to have encouraged HOW INTERNET DOWNLOADING copyright infringement by providing unfettered access to MAY DISPLACE THE RERUN digital music files, media downloads now present a novel question as to whether the newer peer-to-peer networks At the beginning of this century, anyone with a high- (such as BitTorrent) or other unofficial content providers speed Internet connection and a computer with a large or resources providing access to digital video files face the hard drive could find and download almost any song that same infringing concerns. The surface answer, of course, is they wanted for free. Most did so through programs like yes, but the distribution of television shows, and particu- Napster without hesitation based on casuistic entitlement larly broadcast television shows, 10 raises legal issues that reasons or the belief that “everyone was doing it.”13 Just five can and will be distinguishable from those raised in the years later, a similar downloading mentality has entered music piracy cases. the television show market.14 Before exploring whether This article purposely leaves open the question of downloading television shows garners the same types of whether the same analysis could apply to downloaded infringement considerations, a brief summary of modern cable and premium channel television shows, such as orig- downloading is necessary. For purposes of basic foundation inal programming from MTV or HBO, as well as syndicat- only, this article focuses on the principal downloading pro- ed shows, which typically are aired originally on broadcast grams that evolved beginning in the early 2000s.15 television and now appear on other broadcast or cable Napster was the first widely used peer-to-peer net- channels. Although the question of fair use may hinge on working system on the Internet. 16 Napster allowed any user whether the service is paid for by the end user and may of its program to connect to its centralized server, which be mooted by the fact that a homeowner has bundled his regularly indexed the combined shared files of any other 7 Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=979741 JOURNAL OF INTERNET LAW May 2007 user then connected to its system. 17 Thus, if a user, or peer, his file, other end users searching for the same file or files wanted to download a file, Napster’s search engine would will automatically download the incomplete parts obtained provide a link to another user, or peer, who had that file. Its from that user’s computer; and this entire tit-for-tat process software then facilitated the peer-to-peer download. helps to maximize uploading and downloading efficiency. 27 Ultimately, Napster’s centralized server, coupled with Downloading speed also becomes a function of how many its refusal to take sufficient remedial measures to remove users have the file or its component parts on their computers: access to infringing materials, proved its undoing. 18 T o The more people who share, the faster the download. 28 T h e emulate Napster’s success without these same crippling popularity of Cohen’s program, as one reporter puts it, has liability concerns, the next generation of peer-to-peer “transform[ed] the Internet into the world’s largest TiVo.” 29 downloading applications modified the way in which their By means of an example for clarity, assume first that the users could obtain the files that they sought. 19 file to which the end user (A) seeks has 1,000 parts com- Grokster was one such successor program. Unlike prising the whole. If this file were to be downloaded using Napster’s method of indexing its combined user database Napster’s or Grokster’s peer-to-peer program, A would down- to promote easy searching, Grokster’s search engine simply load each of the thousand parts in order from a single peer passed the request to other connected users.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Comparison of the US Supreme Court's <I
    Columbia Law School Scholarship Archive Faculty Scholarship Faculty Publications 2006 Inducers and Authorisers: A Comparison of the US Supreme Court's Grokster Decision and the Australian Federal Court's KaZaa Ruling Jane C. Ginsburg Columbia Law School, [email protected] Sam Ricketson [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, and the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation Jane C. Ginsburg & Sam Ricketson, Inducers and Authorisers: A Comparison of the US Supreme Court's Grokster Decision and the Australian Federal Court's KaZaa Ruling, MEDIA & ARTS LAW REVIEW, VOL. 11, P. 1, 2006; U OF MELBOURNE LEGAL STUDIES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 144; COLUMBIA PUBLIC LAW RESEARCH PAPER NO. 06-105 (2006). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1401 This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Scholarship Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarship Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MELBOURNE LAW SCHOOL Legal Studies Research Paper Studies Paper No. 144 And COLUMBIA LAW SCHOOL Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series Paper No. 06-105 Inducers and Authorisers: A Comparison of the US Supreme Court’s Grokster Decision and the Australian Federal Court’s KaZaa Ruling PROFESSOR JANE GINSBURG COLUMBIA LAW SCHOOL -And- PROFESSOR SAM RICKETSON UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE This paper can be downloaded without charge from the Social Science Research Network Electronic Library at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=888928.
    [Show full text]
  • Importing Kazaa - Exporting Grokster Graeme W
    Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal Volume 22 | Issue 3 Article 7 2006 Importing Kazaa - Exporting Grokster Graeme W. Austin Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Graeme W. Austin, Importing Kazaa - Exporting Grokster, 22 Santa Clara High Tech. L.J. 577 (2005). Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj/vol22/iss3/7 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal by an authorized administrator of Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. IMPORTING KAZAA - EXPORTING GROKSTER Graeme W. Austint I. INTRODUCTION From reading the opinions of the Supreme Court in MGM v. Grokster,1 one might be forgiven for thinking that the legal issues generated by the advent of Peer-to-Peer (P2P) products and services are entirely domestic concerns. 2 The Grokster opinions neither take account of the global dissemination of P2P products and services nor acknowledge the broad geographic dispersion of many of those primary infringements the defendants allegedly induced. But the international aspects of P2P litigation may not remain mere back story for long; they may become an important aspect of the arduous battle that continues between the copyright industries and those who seek to develop new technologies that facilitate the copying and distribution of digital content. Users of P2P products and services are "everywhere around the world."'3 Technology entrepreneurs and their t J.
    [Show full text]
  • Paramount Consent Decree Review Public Comments 2018
    COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF THEATRE OWNERS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ANTITRUST DIVISION REVIEW OF PARAMOUNT CONSENT DECREES October 1, 2018 National Association of Theatre Owners 1705 N Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 962-0054 I. INTRODUCTION The National Association of Theatre Owners (“NATO”) respectfully submits the following comments in response to the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division’s (the “Department”) announced intentions to review the Paramount Consent Decrees (the “Decrees”). Individual motion picture theater companies may comment on the five various provisions of the Decrees but NATO’s comment will focus on one seminal provision of the Decrees. Specifically, NATO urges the Department to maintain the prohibition on block booking, as that prohibition undoubtedly continues to support pro-competitive practices. NATO is the largest motion picture exhibition trade organization in the world, representing more than 33,000 movie screens in all 50 states, and additional cinemas in 96 countries worldwide. Our membership includes the largest cinema chains in the world and hundreds of independent theater owners. NATO and its members have a significant interest in preserving an open marketplace in the North American film industry. North America remains the biggest film-going market in the world: It accounts for roughly 30% of global revenue from only 5% of the global population. The strength of the American movie industry depends on the availability of a wide assortment of films catering to the varied tastes of moviegoers. Indeed, both global blockbusters and low- budget independent fare are necessary to the financial vitality and reputation of the American film industry.
    [Show full text]
  • FASTTRACK Through FUJITSU-DEV
    FASTTRACK through FUJITSU-DEV Americas Headquarters: Cisco Systems, Inc., 170 West Tasman Drive, San Jose, CA 95134-1706 USA FASTTRACK through FUJITSU-DEV FASTTRACK FASTTRACK Name/CLI Keyword fasttrack Full Name FastTrack Description FastTrack is a file sharing client software that is based on peer-to-peer connection. FastTrack is used by multiple file sharing applications such as Kazaa, Grokster, iMesh, and Morpheus. Initialization: Initial the connection with FastTrack server over HTTP. Search: Searching for files in FastTrack server. Download: Download request from FastTracker server. Reference http://developer.berlios.de/projects/gift-fasttrack/ Global ID L7:57 ID 57 Known Mappings UDP Port - TCP Port - IP Protocol - IP Version IPv4 Support Yes IPv6 Support Yes Application Group fasttrack-group Category file-sharing Sub Category p2p-networking P2P Technology Yes Encrypted No Tunnel No Underlying Protocols - 2 FASTTRACK through FUJITSU-DEV FASTTRACK-STATIC FASTTRACK-STATIC Name/CLI Keyword fasttrack-static Full Name fasttrack-static Description FastTrack Traffic - KaZaA Morpheus Grokster... Reference - Global ID L7:1322 ID 1322 Known Mappings UDP Port 1214 TCP Port 1214 IP Protocol - IP Version IPv4 Support Yes IPv6 Support Yes Application Group fasttrack-group Category file-sharing Sub Category p2p-networking P2P Technology Yes Encrypted No Tunnel No Underlying Protocols - 3 FASTTRACK through FUJITSU-DEV FATSERV FATSERV Name/CLI Keyword fatserv Full Name Fatmen Server Description Fatmen Server Reference - Global ID L4:305 ID 305 Known
    [Show full text]
  • Pure Software in an Impure World? WINNY, Japan's First P2P Case
    20 U. OF PENNSYLVANIA EAST ASIA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 8 ! ! ! ! [This Page Intentionally Left Blank.] ! Pure Software in an Impure World? WINNY, Japan’s First P2P Case Ridwan Khan* “Even the purest technology has to live in an impure world.”1 In 2011, Japan’s Supreme Court decided its first contributory infringement peer-to-peer case, involving Isamu Kaneko and his popular file-sharing program, Winny. This program was used in Japan to distribute many copyrighted works, including movies, video games, and music. At the district court level, Kaneko was found guilty of contributory infringement, fined 1.5 million yen, and sentenced to one year in prison. However, the Osaka High Court reversed the district court and found for Kaneko. The High Court decision was then affirmed by the Supreme Court, which settled on a contributory infringement standard based on fault, similar to the standard announced by the United States Supreme Court in MGM Studios * The author would like to thank Professor David Shipley of the University of Georgia for his guidance in preparing this article. He would also like to thank Professor Paul Heald of the University of Illinois College of Law for additional help. Finally, the author expresses gratitude to Shinya Nochioka of the Ministry of Finance and Yuuka Kawazoe of Osaka Jogakuin for their friendship and advice on Japanese legal matters and language through the two years spent researching and writing this article. All mistakes, however, are the responsibility of the author. All translations of Japanese language materials into English are by the author. 1 Benjamin Wallace, The Rise and Fall of Bitcoin, WIRED MAGAZINE (Nov.
    [Show full text]
  • Ways Accompanies Our Review of Official Court Granted Certiorari
    2764 125 SUPREME COURT REPORTER 545 U.S. 912 first and second displays to the third. Giv- Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 380 en the presumption of regularity that al- F.3d 1154, affirmed, and the Supreme ways accompanies our review of official Court granted certiorari. action, see n. 9, supra, the Court has iden- Holding: The Supreme Court, Justice tified no evidence of a purpose to advance Souter, held that one who distributes a religion in a way that is inconsistent with device with the object of promoting its use our cases. The Court may well be correct to infringe copyright, as shown by clear in identifying the third displays as the fruit expression or other affirmative steps taken of a desire to display the Ten Command- to foster infringement, is liable for the ments, ante, at 2740, but neither our cases resulting acts of infringement by third par- nor our history support its assertion that ties. such a desire renders the fruit poisonous. Vacated and remanded. * * * Justice Ginsburg filed concurring opinion For the foregoing reasons, I would re- in which Chief Justice Rehnquist and Jus- verse the judgment of the Court of Ap- tice Kennedy joined. peals. Justice Breyer filed concurring opinion in which Justice Stevens and Justice O’Con- , nor joined. 1. Copyrights and Intellectual Property O77 One infringes a copyright contribu- 545 U.S. 913, 162 L.Ed.2d 781 torily by intentionally inducing or encour- METRO–GOLDWYN–MAYER aging direct infringement and infringes STUDIOS INC., et al., vicariously by profiting from direct in- Petitioners, fringement while declining to exercise a v.
    [Show full text]
  • Entertainment Studios Networks the Goodfriend Group 1925 Century Park East, 10Th Floor 208 I St
    Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of Conditions Imposed in the ) WC Docket No.16-197 Charter Communications-Time Warner ) Cable-Bright House Networks Order ) PETITION TO DENY Mark DeVitre David R. Goodfriend Executive Vice President and General Counsel Meagan M. Sunn Entertainment Studios Networks The Goodfriend Group 1925 Century Park East, 10th Floor 208 I St. NE Los Angeles, CA 90067 Washington, D.C. 20002 (310) 277-3500 (202) 549-5612 July 22, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY…………………………………………....1 II. CHARTER’S INCENTIVE AND ABILITY TO FAVOR SOME EDGE PROVIDERS OVER OTHERS AND ITS SELF-PROFESSED DESIRE TO DISCRIMINATE BASED ON RACE SHOULD PREVENT THE COMMISSION FROM LIFTING MERGER CONDITIONS…............................3 A. The Commission established the merger conditions to prevent Charter from engaging in anti-competitive economic discrimination…...............3 B. Charter’s statements in federal district and appellate court reveal its desire to discriminate based on race….....................................................4 C. Lifting the merger conditions likely would harm ESN, other minority-owned businesses, and minority consumers…..........................5 ​ III. THE COMMISSION’S UNTIMELY COMMENCEMENT OF THIS PROCEEDING SHOULD RENDER THE OUTCOME MOOT………………..11 ​ A. The Commission lacks authority to commence this proceeding prior to August 18, 2020….....................................................................................11 ​ ​ B. ESN relied on the timeframe
    [Show full text]
  • The US Film Industry
    Jono Polansky, Onbeyond LLC August 2020 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ This SFM guide to who owns what in the US screen entertainment industry — movies, broadcast, cable and streaming — has been updated to reflect developments in tobacco content and changes in corporate ownership. We put this map together so public health experts, parents, young people and policy makers can identify who decides if smoking shows up in entertainment accessible to kids. The US film industry MAJOR STUDIOS | The US feature film industry is dominated by five “major studio” distributors. In 2019, their top-grossing films accounted for 81 percent of all youth-rated tobacco impressions delivered to domestic theater audiences. The studios develop, finance, and market film projects domestically and worldwide. Almost all films with production budgets greater than $50 million are major studio films. Studios may not break even on theatrical showings of a film, but a film’s box office, split roughly 50-50 with the theaters, strongly predicts the revenue the studio keeps to itself when the film is later released on DVD and licensed to on-demand, cable, and broadcast services. Most studio revenue comes from those “long tail” after-markets. In addition, 70 percent of US studios’ theatrical revenue now comes from outside the United States, which helps explain why easy-to-sell “franchise” films are prized by major studios. The major studios are represented by a trade group, the Motion Picture Association (MPA), dominate its board of directors. The MPA owns and administers the movie ratings (G/PG/PG-13/R,NC-17), with a nod to the National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO), which plays a role in enforcing age restrictions.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright Infringement on Music, Movie and Software in the Internet (Illegal File Sharing and Fair Use Practices in Indonesia, Japan and United States of America)
    Copyright Infringement on Music, Movie and Software in the Internet (Illegal File Sharing and Fair Use Practices in Indonesia, Japan and United States of America) A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor Philosophy in Law Bayu Sujadmiko 1221072013 Kanazawa University Graduate School of Human and Socio-Environmental Studies 2015/2016 要旨 インターネット技術は、インドネシア、日本、米国を含む世界中で広く利用され ている。発展につれて、それら応用技術は人類の福祉にとって不法な行為を誘発 する「両刃の剣」となった。デジタル化可能なほとんどの著作物は、インターネ ットを介した複製及び物理的侵害の蓋然性にさらされることとなった。違法ダウ ンロード、アップロード、ファイル共有が市民の間に広がったが、インドネシア の立法は、インターネット技術の進歩への反応が鈍かった。その結果、著作権産 業がフラッシュ・ドライバ、スマートフォン、タブレットなどの高度モバイル技 術というデジタル著作権侵害の新しい成長の問題に直面しているのにもかかわら ず、対策は、違法コンテンツや海賊製品の普及に対してのみ行われている。いく つかの国では、これらのデバイスは、それらが販売される前から違法なコンテン ツをインストールされている。政府によれば、彼らは物理的及びオンラインの海 賊行為を停止するための解決法を探している。本論文は、日本、米国、インドネ シアにおける著作権法のシステムを比較する。また、国際的な規制が、刑事罰と 罰金の執行においてこれら各国にどのような影響を与えるかを説明する。著作権 法に関する立法のみではインターネット上の課題には答えられないことを示す点 でも有益である。技術的、手続的、社会的、制度的に効率的な執行システムの具 体的な調和が必要とされている。 Abstract The utilization of Internet technology is widely practiced by the entire population of the globe, including Indonesia, Japan and United States. During its development, applied technology became a “double-edged sword”, in addition to the mankind welfare; it is used for unlawful acts. Most copyrighted works that can be reformed to digitize have big probability to duplicate over the Internet and physical piracy. Illegal downloading, uploading and file sharing became common activities among the citizenry. Indonesian legislation was low respond to follow the advance of Internet technology. Consequently, legal enforcement is performed only among the spread of illegal contents and pirate products. While, copyright industries face new growing problems with digital piracy; flash drivers, smartphones, tablets and other high mobile technologies. In some countries, these devices are preloaded with illegal content even before they are sold. Accompanied by the government, they try to find the solutions to stop the physical and online piracy.
    [Show full text]
  • METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS INC. V. GROKSTER, LTD. 545 U.S
    METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS INC. v. GROKSTER, LTD. 545 U.S. 913 Supreme Court of United States. Decided June 27, 2005. 17 JUSTICE SOUTER delivered the opinion of the Court. 18 The question is under what circumstances the distributor of a product capable of both lawful and unlawful use is liable [545 U.S. 919] for acts of copyright infringement by third parties using the product. We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties. I A 21 Respondents, Grokster, Ltd., and StreamCast Networks, Inc., defendants in the trial court, distribute free software products that allow computer users to share electronic files through peer-to-peer networks, so called because users' computers communicate directly with each other, not through [545 U.S. 920] central servers. The advantage of peer-to-peer networks over information networks of other types shows up in their substantial and growing popularity. Because they need no central computer server to mediate the exchange of information or files among users, the high-bandwidth communications capacity for a server may be dispensed with, and the need for costly server storage space is eliminated. Since copies of a file (particularly a popular one) are available on many users' computers, file requests and retrievals may be faster than on other types of networks, and since file exchanges do not travel through a server, communications can take place between any computers that remain connected to the network without risk that a glitch in the server will disable the network in its entirety.
    [Show full text]
  • Emmy Nominations
    2021 Emmy® Awards 73rd Emmy Awards Complete Nominations List Outstanding Animated Program Big Mouth • The New Me • Netflix • Netflix Bob's Burgers • Worms Of In-Rear-Ment • FOX • 20th Century Fox Television / Bento Box Animation Genndy Tartakovsky's Primal • Plague Of Madness • Adult Swim • Cartoon Network Studios The Simpsons • The Dad-Feelings Limited • FOX • A Gracie Films Production in association with 20th Television Animation South Park: The Pandemic Special • Comedy Central • Central Productions, LLC Outstanding Short Form Animated Program Love, Death + Robots • Ice • Netflix • Blur Studio for Netflix Maggie Simpson In: The Force Awakens From Its Nap • Disney+ • A Gracie Films Production in association with 20th Television Animation Once Upon A Snowman • Disney+ • Walt Disney Animation Studios Robot Chicken • Endgame • Adult Swim • A Stoopid Buddy Stoodios production with Williams Street and Sony Pictures Television Outstanding Production Design For A Narrative Contemporary Program (One Hour Or More) The Flight Attendant • After Dark • HBO Max • HBO Max in association with Berlanti Productions, Yes, Norman Productions, and Warner Bros. Television Sara K. White, Production Designer Christine Foley, Art Director Jessica Petruccelli, Set Decorator The Handmaid's Tale • Chicago • Hulu • Hulu, MGM, Daniel Wilson Productions, The Littlefield Company, White Oak Pictures Elisabeth Williams, Production Designer Martha Sparrow, Art Director Larry Spittle, Art Director Rob Hepburn, Set Decorator Mare Of Easttown • HBO • HBO in association with wiip Studios, TPhaeg eL o1w Dweller Productions, Juggle Productions, Mayhem Mare Of Easttown • HBO • HBO in association with wiip Studios, The Low Dweller Productions, Juggle Productions, Mayhem and Zobot Projects Keith P. Cunningham, Production Designer James F. Truesdale, Art Director Edward McLoughlin, Set Decorator The Undoing • HBO • HBO in association with Made Up Stories, Blossom Films, David E.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Pioneer of the Year C H E R Y L B O O N E I S a A
    1947 ADOLPH ZUKOR n 1948 GUS EYSSEL n 1949 CECIL B. DEMILLE n 1950 SPYROS P. SKOURAS n 1951 JACK, HARRY & ALBERT WARNER n 1952 NATE BLUMBERG n 1953 BARNEY BALABAN n 1954 SIMON FABIAN n 1955 HERMAN ROBBINS n 1956 ROBERT O’DONNELL n 1957 JOSEPH VOGEL n 1958 ROBERT BENJAMIN & ARTHUR B. KRIM n 1959 STEVE BROIDY n 1960 JOSEPH E. LEVINE n 1961 ABE MONTAGUE n 1962 MILTON RACKMIL n 1963 DARRYL F. ZANUCK n 1964 HAROLD J. MIRISCH n 1965 ROBERT O’BRIEN n 1966 WILLIAM R. FORMAN n 1967 LEONARD GOLDENSON n 1968 LAURENCE A. TISCH n 1969 HARRY BRANDT n 1970 IRVING H. LEVIN n 1971 SAMUEL Z. ARKOFF & JAMES H . NICHOLSON n 1972 LEO JAFFE n 1973 TED ASHLEY n 1974 HENRY MARTIN n 1975 E. CARDON WALKER n 1976 CARL PATRICK n 1977 SHERRILL C. CORWIN n 1978 DR. JULES STEIN n 1979 HENRY PLITT 2017 PIONEER OF THE YEAR CHERYL BOONE ISAACS n 1980 BOB HOPE n 1981 SALAH HASSANEIN n 1982 FRANK PRICE n 1983 BERNARD MYERSON n 1984 SIDNEY SHEINBERG n 1985 JOHN ROWLEY n 1986 MICHAEL FORMAN n 1987 FRANK G. MANCUSO n 1988 JACK VALENTI n 1989 ALLEN PINSKER n 1990 TERRY SEMEL n 1991 SUMNER REDSTONE n 1992 MIKE MEDAVOY n 1993 STANLEY DUR- WOOD n 1994 WALTER DUNN n 1995 ROBERT SHAYE n 1996 SHERRY LANSING n 1997 BRUCE CORWIN n 1998 BUD STONE n 1999 KURT C. HALL n 2000 ROBERT DOWLING n 2001 ROBERT REHME n 2002 JONA- THAN DOLGEN n 2003 MICHAEL EISNER n 2004 ALAN HORN n 2005– 2006 TRAVIS REID n 2007 JEFF BLAKE n 2008 MIKE CAMPBELL n 2009 MARC SHMUGER & DAVID LINDE n 2010 ROB MOORE n 2011 DICK COOK n 2012 JEFFREY KATZENBERG n 2013 KATHLEEN KENNEDY n 2014 TOM SHERAK n 2015 JIM GIANOPULOS n DONNA LANGLEY 2017 PIONEER OF THE YEAR CHERYL BOONE ISAACS 2017 PIONEER OF THE YEAR Welcome On behalf of the Board of Directors of the Will Rogers Motion Picture Pioneers Foundation, thank you for attending the 2017 Pioneer of the Year Dinner.
    [Show full text]