<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>AllThingsD &#187; U.S. Supreme Court</title>
	<atom:link href="http://allthingsd.com/tag/us-supreme-court/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://allthingsd.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 00:49:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<atom:link rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com"/>		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court to Hear Videogames Case</title>
		<link>http://allthingsd.com/20100427/supreme-court-to-hear-videogames-case/</link>
		<comments>http://allthingsd.com/20100427/supreme-court-to-hear-videogames-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 12:00:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brent Kendall</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Activision Blizzard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brent Kendall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Call of Duty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[digital]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[frontpage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Grand Theft Auto]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[minors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rockstar Games]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Take-Two Interactive Software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Wall Street Journal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[videogames]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[violence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=24408</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide the constitutionality of a California law that seeks to ban the sale of violent videogames to minors.

Two lower courts struck down the law as an unconstitutional restriction on freedom of speech.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide the constitutionality of a California law that seeks to ban the sale of violent videogames to minors.</p>
<p>Two lower courts struck down the law as an unconstitutional restriction on freedom of speech.</p>
<p>How the high court rules could affect videogame makers such as Activision Blizzard Inc. (ATVI), producer of &#8220;Call of Duty,&#8221; and Take-Two Interactive Software Inc.&#8217;s (TTWO) Rockstar Games, which makes &#8220;Grand Theft Auto.&#8221; The case could also have implications for the broader entertainment industry, specifically for producers of violent movies and television shows.</p>
<p>Last week, the court took a broad view of the First Amendment when it struck down a federal law banning depictions of animal cruelty. The court said the law was too sweeping in restricting speech.</p>
<p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704464704575208463106126530.html?mod=WSJ_Tech_LEADTop">Read the rest of this post on the original site</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://allthingsd.com/20100427/supreme-court-to-hear-videogames-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cablevision: Supreme Court Won’t Block Network DVR</title>
		<link>http://allthingsd.com/20090629/cablevision-supreme-court-won%e2%80%99t-block-network-dvr/</link>
		<comments>http://allthingsd.com/20090629/cablevision-supreme-court-won%e2%80%99t-block-network-dvr/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:50:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Savitz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cablevision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CBS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cloud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyrights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DVR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eric Savitz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[film studio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[frontpage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[set-top box]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Trader Daily]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[television]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Time Warner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[video]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=13046</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.S. Supreme Court today cleared the way for Cablevision to offer a network DVR service, allowing consumers to record copies of television programming “in the cloud,” rather than on set-top boxes. Without comment, the court refused to review a Court of Appeals ruling that rejected claims by film studios and television networks that the network DVR approach would infringe copyrights.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The U.S. Supreme Court today cleared the way for Cablevision (CVC) to offer a network DVR service, allowing consumers to record copies of television programming “in the cloud,” rather than on set-top boxes.</p>
<p>Without comment, the court refused to review a Court of Appeals ruling that rejected claims by film studios and television networks that the network DVR approach would infringe copyrights.</p>
<p>Cablevision first announced plans for the service in 2006, but it has been tied up in litigation&#8211;until now. Among the companies opposed to the concept were Time Warner (TWX), CBS (CBS) and Disney (DIS).</p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2009/06/29/cablevision-supreme-court-wont-block-network-dvr/">Read the rest of this post on the original site</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://allthingsd.com/20090629/cablevision-supreme-court-won%e2%80%99t-block-network-dvr/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

