WPC? VP!b Hf]XܕFScJFkEqpHbuo*(Ļ1;pFvM^JnE,x(Vn7lUԅ0|;K>[ KY% +jI$XiC Uj&&1!j,oSa%|Dgeqȹ1uw$@:J_r7f C+|.սpdIEb(d:tIjZ!n6jWG zԊS. r[gKjyo{ =/f,'@0L<3dI_ǨE,mi5酱V#[{KN4qq Q"A,Ie$[!$hlևQ}R1[ך8ZQ!] y]]mi|6ΞDư=g[#UN % 0F EU ^ W wc 4g {  m  0n 0D N<U0>bn*v 08 0& 0 0 0 0 0 0{ 0T 0* 0 0 0 0 0X 0% 0 0 0z 0U 0- 0! 0! 0" 0o# 08$ 0$% 0b)5*U0-9 . 0bC.UN. 00. 0<#/ 0_/ 0>0 0v[0 0`0 0`11 0`1 0`1 0`Q2 082 02 023 03 0:4 0Y#5 0_|5 0 5 0j6 0O8 B*9 D/9 D+,: 0W: D/; 0 < 06< 0= 0:> 0^P> 0<>U6>U > ?U*^?b?? B?\\CIVNT08\ph4i9554,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular(i$  USUS.,Ո() X)%(|Corel3|x!U   $  USUS.,    1    _ԀThisbriefdoesnotaddressorexpressaviewregardinganyissueinthiscase  otherthantheAHRAissue.ForpurposesofaddressingtheAHRAissue,theUnited  Statesassumesthattheplaintiffshavemadeoutanotherwisevalidclaimfor $ contributoryand/orvicariouscopyrightinfringementagainstNapsterbasedontheuse 6 ofNapster'sserviceandsoftwarebyconsumerstoexchangecomputerfilescontaining H copyrightedmusicalworks.  Z   l    WenotethatoneoftheamiciparticipatinginthisappealisaformerRegister  ofCopyrights,RalphOman.AsaformerRegister,Mr.Omanspeaksforhimselfand  hisclientratherthantheCopyrightOffice.(:(3$ i!  USUS.,      0  (%$  1  ) p`CG Times- - Napster AHRA 4q&  USUS.,  _wordcount  TC/TA  certificates2G+J 0_level1  X /%4 4 <DL/23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2D+J 0_level2   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2A+J 0_level3   ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2>+J 0_level4  ` &<<DL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2;+J 0_level5   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  28+J 0_level6    DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  25+J 0_level7  h DDL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  22+J 0_level8   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2/+J 0_level9    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2GJ 0_levsl1  X /%4 4 <DL/23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2DJ 0_levsl2   ," <DL,23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2AJ 0_levsl3   ) <DL)23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2>J 0_levsl4  ` &<<DL&23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2;J 0_levsl5   #DL#23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  28J 0_levsl6    DL 23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  25J 0_levsl7  h DDL23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  22J 0_levsl8   L23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2/J 0_levsl9    L23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2GJ 0_levnl1  X /%4 4 <DL/23   2( 4 <DL2  2DJ 0_levnl2   ," <DL,23   2( 4 <DL2  2AJ 0_levnl3   ) <DL)23   2( 4 <DL2  2>J 0_levnl4  ` &<<DL&23   2( 4 <DL2  2;J 0_levnl5   #DL#23   2( 4 <DL2  28J 0_levnl6    DL 23   2( 4 <DL2  25J 0_levnl7  h DDL23   2( 4 <DL2  22J 0_levnl8   L23   2( 4 <DL2  2/J 0_levnl9    L23   2( 4 <DL2     $  USUS.,    2    _Ԁ0Weshouldnotbeunderstoodtosuggestthateverydistributionofa  copyrightedwork,regardlessofitsscopeorattendantcircumstances,isnecessarily  aninfringementofthestatutoryrightofdistribution.Therightofdistribution $ conferredby17U.S.C.106(3)isarightofpublicdistribution!theright"to 6 distributecopiesorphonorecordsofthecopyrightedworktothepublic"(emphasis H added).See#00s#00#00#V00V0V02MelvilleB.Nimmer&DavidNimmer,NimmeronCopyright  Z 8.11[A](1999)#0V0##00<#.(:3q$ i!  USUS.,     $  USUS.,    3    _ԀAsnotedabove,unlikedigitalaudiorecordingtechnology,analogrecording  technologyhasinherentlimitationsthatmakeitsubstantiallylessusefulforcopying  ingeneralandserialcopyinginparticular.Forthatreason,theActdoesnotrequire $ manufacturersofanalogrecordingdevicesandmediatomakeroyaltypaymentsor 6 incorporateantiserialcopyingcircuitry.Theexclusionofanalogrecordingdevices H andmediafromtheroyaltyandserialcopyingrequirementsoftheActdoesnotmean  Z thatthestatuteisnotpredicatedinaquidproquo.Instead,itsimplymeansthatthe  l rationaleforthequidproquoisnotimplicatedbyanalogtaping.2 `CG Times +SRMScott McIntosh(:3q$ i!  USUS.,  (hH  Z6Times New Roman Regular0.Normal<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(''&H1   XXX   (&H2 XXX (&H3 XXX (&H4 XXX XXX(&H5 XXX (&H6 XXX 20Address8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEKU<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSV\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard KU<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSV\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/KU<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSV\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 7K(X7  ?W%2A`Arial?  XXXSV\  `&Times New RomanS7L(X7&  d dJ)1dxd'dxd<:zTop of For7N(X7  ?W%2A`Arial?  XXXSV\  `&Times New RomanS7L(X7J)2dxd0KS.SampleKU<6X9`(Courier NewKSV\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterKU<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSV\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  <6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial- - d i!  USUS.,  _     NOS.0016401&0016403  IAZ) xdExA V AZ) xdExA    INTHEUNITEDSTATESCOURTOFAPPEALS v FORTHENINTHCIRCUIT36` !  ____________________ |  A&MRECORDS,INC.,etal. "  PlaintiffsAppellants, x (  v.  ~  NAPSTER,INC., $  DefendantAppellant. z* ____________________ % JERRYLEIBER,individuallyandd/b/aJERRYLEIBERMUSIC,etal., {+ PlaintiffsAppellants,  v. ' NAPSTER,INC., }- DefendantAppellant.   ____________________ ~.! ONAPPEALFROMTHEUNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURT # FORTHENORTHERNDISTRICTOFCALIFORNIA /$ ____________________ *% BRIEFFORTHEUNITEDSTATESASAMICUSCURIAE 0' ____________________ +( DAVIDO.CARSON0 0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#DAVIDW.OGDEN,+(#(# ЀGeneralCounsel0 0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#AssistantAttorneyGeneral,(#(# J.KENT_DUNLAP_0 0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#MARKB.STERN- .(#(#    `     h     SCOTTR._McINTOSH_  / UnitedStatesCopyrightOffice0  0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#Attorneys,AppellateStaff!3!0(#(# LibraryofCongress ."!1 101IndependenceAve._S.E._   h     CivilDivision,DepartmentofJustice ""2 Washington,D.C.205400   0h (# (#    601DStreet_N.W._,Room95500xh(#h(#0 x(#x(#0@ x(#x(##4#3 (# (#    ` 0 0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#Washington,D.C.20520/$#4(#(# _ALBIN_ԀF._DROST_ $$5 ЀActingGeneralCounsel    h 0    CounselfortheUnitedStates%5%6(#(# JUSTINHUGHES &&8 UnitedStatesPatentandTrademarkOffice 1(': P.O.Box15667 ((; Arlington,VA22215 )7)< OfCounsel **> AZ) xdE,xA ,,A ( AZ) xdE-xA X X(  -F-C X80dd8  0 XX  TABLEOFCONTENTS   ~   `     h      p      x  Page  a TABLEOFAUTHORITIESb"b"H(#.@@iii F  STATEMENTOFINTEREST""J(#.2 & v STATEMENTOFISSUES""J(#.3  V  STATEMENTOFTHECASE""J(#.3 6  A.0  TheAudioHomeRecordingActof1992#""J(#.3(#(##3   B.0  ThePresentLitigation#""J(#.>>%(#(##7   SUMMARYOFARGUMENT""J(#.,,8  ARGUMENT<"<"I(#. 11 f SECTION1008OFTHEAUDIOHOMERECORDINGACTOF1992 F DOESNOTEXCUSENAPSTERFROMLIABILITYFORCOPYRIGHT 6 INFRINGEMENT<"<"I(#. 11 &v A.0  Napster'sImmunityDefenseIsForeclosedbythePlainLanguageV(#(#   ofSection1008<"<"I(#. 12 F   1.0 ` Napster'sUsersAreNotUsingAnyofthe"Devices"&` (#` (#    ` or"Media"CoveredbySection1008<"<"I(#.613    2.0 ` Napster'sUsersAreNotMaking"DigitalMusicalRecordings"!` (#` (#    ` or"AnalogMusicalRecordings"<"<"I(#.ll216 "    3.0 ` Section1008ProvidesImmunityOnlyforNoncommercialv$"` (#` (#    ` Copying,NotforPublicDistribution<"<"I(#.817 f% #   4.0 ` Section1008DoesNotTransformInfringingConsumerUsesF'"%` (#` (#    ` IntoNonInfringingOnes<"<"I(#.,19  6(#&  B.0  Napster'sRelianceonSection1008IsInconsistentWiththePolicies(#(#   UnderlyingtheAHRA<"<"I(#.\\"22    1.0 ` Napster'sInvocationofSection1008UpsetstheQuidProQuo` (#` (#    ` thatUnderliestheAct<"<"I(#.tt*23 p   2.0 ` Section1008WasNotIntendedToImmunizeAllConsumerP ` (#` (#    ` CopyingofMusicalRecordings<"<"I(#.  125 @    3.0 ` TheLegislativeHistoryofStatutesOtherThantheAHRA p ` (#` (#    ` IsIrrelevant<"<"I(#. !27 `  C.0  DiamondMultimediaDoesNotResolvetheAHRAImmunity@ (#(#   QuestionAtIssueinthisCase<"<"I(#.  -28 0  CONCLUSION<"<"I(#. 30  CERTIFICATEOFCOMPLIANCE  CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE     X8X Xdd8  NOS.0016401&0016403  AZ) xdExA  AZ) xdExA    INTHEUNITEDSTATESCOURTOFAPPEALS  FORTHENINTHCIRCUIT   ____________________ v  A&MRECORDS,INC.,etal. Z   PlaintiffsAppellants, >  v. "r  NAPSTER,INC., V  DefendantAppellant. : ____________________ , JERRY_LEIBER_,individuallyandd/b/aJERRY_LEIBER_ԀMUSIC,etal.,  PlaintiffsAppellants,  v.  NAPSTER,INC., l DefendantAppellant. P ____________________ B ONAPPEALFROMTHEUNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURT &!v  FORTHENORTHERNDISTRICTOFCALIFORNIA "h! ____________________  #Z" BRIEFFORTHEUNITEDSTATESASAMICUSCURIAE $> $ ____________________ %0!%    TheUnitedStatessubmitsthisbriefasanamicuscuriae,200pursuantto28U.S.C. ($(  517andRule29(a)oftheFederalRulesofAppellateProcedure#020H!#,toaddressthe **&* effectoftheimmunityprovisionoftheAudioHomeRecordingActof1992,  17U.S.C.1008. $    STATEMENTOFINTEREST  H "  TheUnitedStatesCopyrightOfficeischargedbystatutewiththeresponsibility  p toprovideCongress,federalagencies,andthecourtswith"informationandassistance D  ***onnationalandinternationalissuesrelatingtocopyright***."17U.S.C. h  701(b)(1)(2).TheUnitedStatesPatentandTrademarkOfficeischargedwith   advisingthePresidentandallfederalagencies onmattersofintellectualproperty  policyintheUnitedStates***."35U.S.C.2(b).Consistentwiththesestatutory $ provisions,theUnitedStatesparticipatesasanamicuscuriaetoprovidecourtswith H theviewsofthefederalgovernment,includingtheCopyrightOfficeandthePatent l andTrademarkOffice,regardingsignificantcopyrightandotherintellectualproperty @ issues. d   Althoughthiscasepresentsanumberofimportantissues,oneissuein   particularimplicatestherolesoftheCopyrightOfficeandthePatentandTrademark " Office!theoperationandeffectoftheAudioHomeRecordingActof1992 $  ("AHRA"or"Act").TheCopyrightOfficeplaysacentralroleintheadministration &D"  oftheAct.See17U.S.C.1003(b)(c),1005,1007,1009(e).Moreover,the )h$" CopyrightOfficeandthePatentandTrademarkOfficeprovidedCongresswith <+&$ adviceandassistanceduringthelegislativedeliberationsleadingtotheenactmentof  theAct.Forthesereasons,theUnitedStatesbelievesthatthegovernment'sviews $ regardingthescopeandapplicationoftheAct'simmunityprovisionmayassistthe H Courtintheresolutionofthatissue.  l   STATEMENTOFISSUES  @  *  WhetherSection1008oftheAudioHomeRecordingActof1992,17U.S.C. h  1008,excusesNapsterfromliabilityforcopyrightinfringement.      STATEMENTOFTHECASE   + A.0  TheAudioHomeRecordingActof1992((#(#   TheAudioHomeRecordingActisCongress'sresponsetoacontroversy P betweenthemusicindustryandtheconsumerelectronicsindustryregardingthe $t introductionofdigitalaudiorecordingtechnologyintothedomesticconsumer H market.TheActrepresentsanefforttoresolvethatcontroversythroughacarefully l developedandfinelybalancedlegislativecompromise.SeegenerallyH.R.Rep.No.   873(I),102dCong.,2dSess.1113(1992)("HouseReport"),reprintedin1992U.S. " CodeCong.&Admin.News("USCCAN")35813583;S.Rep.No.294,102dCong., $(  2dSess.3045(1992)("SenateReport"). &L"    Beginninginthe1980s,consumerelectronicsfirmsbegantodeveloptape  )p$" recordersandotherconsumerrecordingdevicesthatemploydigitalaudiorecording D+&$ _technology.Unliketraditionalanalogrecordingtechnology,whichresultsin  perceptibledifferencesbetweenthesourcematerialandthecopy,digitalrecording $ technologypermitsconsumerstomakecopiesofrecordedmusicthatareidenticalto H theoriginalrecording.Moreover,adigitalcopycanitselfbecopiedwithoutany  l degradationofsoundquality,openingthedoortosocalled"serialcopying"!making @  multiplegenerationsofcopies,eachidenticaltotheoriginalsource. d    Thecapabilityofdigitalaudiorecordingtechnologytoproduceperfectcopies   ofrecordedmusicmadethetechnologyattractivetotheconsumerelectronics  industry,whichanticipatedsubstantialconsumerdemandfortaperecordersandother   recordingdevicesequippedwithdigitalrecordingtechnology.However,thesame D capabilitywasasourceofconcerntothemusicindustry,whichfearedthatthe h introductionofdigitalaudiorecordingtechnologywouldleadtoavastexpansionof < "hometaping"ofcopyrightedsoundrecordingsandacorrespondinglossofsales. `   Whendigitalaudiorecordingtechnologyfirstbecameavailableforthe   consumermarket,thelegalityofhometapingofcopyrightedsoundrecordingswas " asubjectofongoingcontroversybetweenthemusicindustryandtheconsumer $  electronicsindustry.SeeHouseReportat1112,reprintedin1992USCCANat &@"  35813582;SenateReportat31.InSonyCorp.v.UniversalCityStudios,Inc.,464 )d$" U.S.417(1984),theSupremeCourtheldthattheuseofVCRrecordingtechnology 8+&$ byconsumerstomakehomecopiesofbroadcastprogramsforviewingatanothertime  ("timeshifting")constitutedanoninfringing"fairuse"ofthecopyrightedmaterial. $ Theconsumerelectronicsindustry,togetherwithconsumergroups,arguedthatSony H recognizedageneralrighttoengageinhometapingofcopyrightedmaterialsfor  l personaluse;themusicindustryarguedthatSonywasdecidedonnarrowgroundsand @  didnotgivetheCourt'sgeneralimprimaturtohometaping. d    In1990,musicpublishersandsongwritersfiledaclassactionsuitforcopyright   infringementagainstSonyCorporation,whichhadbeguntomarketDAT(Digital  AudioTape)recorders.Duringthecourseofthelitigation,negotiationswere   undertakentodevelopageneralnonjudicialsolutiontothedigitalaudiorecording D controversy.Therecordingindustry,recordingartists,songwriters,musicpublishers, h theconsumerelectronicsindustry,andconsumergroupsallparticipatedinthe < negotiations.SenateReportat33&n.16. `   Thenegotiationsculminatedin1991inacompromiseagreementamongthe   interestedparties,whichwaspresentedtoCongressasthebasisforlegislation.The " AHRAembodiestheessentialtermsofthatcompromise.SeeHouseReportat13, $  reprintedin1992USCCANat3583;SenateReportat3334.Thecompromise &@"  involvesabasicquidproquobetweenthemusicindustryontheonehandandthe )d$" consumerelectronicsindustryandconsumersontheother. 8+&$   TheAHRAprovidesthemusicindustrywithtwoprincipalbenefitsrelatingto  digitalaudiorecordingtechnology.First,theActrequiresmanufacturersof"digital $ audiorecordingdevices"toincorporatecircuitrythatpreventsserialcopying. H 17U.S.C.1001(11),1002.Second,theActrequiresmanufacturersof"digital  l audiorecordingdevices"and"digitalaudiorecordingmedia"topayprescribed @  royaltiesintoafundthatisdistributedtocopyrightholders.Id.10031007.The d  royaltypaymentsystemisadministeredbytheCopyrightOffice.Id.1005,1007.     Inexchangeforthesebenefits,theAHRAprovidesmanufacturersand  consumerswithprescribedstatutoryimmunityfromsuitsforcopyrightinfringement.   ThisimmunityiscontainedinSection1008oftheAct,17U.S.C.1008,which D provides: h 8  & l Noactionmaybebroughtunderthistitlealleginginfringementof < copyright[1]basedonthemanufacture,importation,ordistributionof N adigitalaudiorecordingdevice,adigitalaudiorecordingmedium,an ` analogrecordingdevice,orananalogrecordingmedium,or[2]based r onthenoncommercialusebyaconsumerofsuchadeviceormedium   formakingdigitalmusicalrecordingsoranalogmusicalrecordings.'l<CC!     Byitsterms,Section1008disallowstwokindsofactionsforcopyright #  infringement.Thefirstareactions"basedonthemanufacture,importation,or %.! distribution"ofthespecifiedrecordingdevicesandrecordingmedia.Thesecondare (R#! actions"basedonthenoncommercialusebyaconsumerofsuchadeviceormedium &*v%# formakingdigitalmusicalrecordingsoranalogmusicalrecordings."Section1008  barsanyactionforcopyrightinfringement"underthistitle"!Title17oftheUnited $ StatesCode!basedontheseactivities. H  B.0  ThePresentLitigation  l(#(#   InDecember1999,theplaintiffsbroughtthisactionforcopyrightinfringement D  againstNapsterintheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia.Napsterisacentralizedservice h  thatgreatlysimplifiesandexpandstheabilityofInternetuserstocopyMP3music   filesfromotherpersons'computers.Itdoessobyprovidinga"virtualmeetingplace"  whereanindividualuseroftheNapstersystemcanfindMP3musicfilesonthehard $ driveofothercomputersparticipating,atthatmoment,intheNapster"community." H Napsterthenfacilitiesthedirect"peertopeer"copyingandtransferofthosefiles. l   Ingeneralterms,theplaintiffsassertedthatconsumerswhouseNapster's @ Internetbasedserviceandsoftwaretoexchangesoundfilescontainingcopyrighted d musicalrecordingsareengagedincopyrightinfringementandthatNapsterisliable   forcontributoryinfringementandvicariousinfringement. "   Napsterdeniedthatitsusersareengagedininfringementorthatitsownactions $  makeitliableforcontributoryorvicariousinfringement.Inaddition,Napster &D"  assertedanumberofaffirmativedefenses.Amongthoseisadefensebasedon )h$" Section1008oftheAHRA.Napsterarguedthattheactivitiesofitsusersare <+&$ immunizedbySection1008andthat,asaconsequence,Napsteritselfcannotbeheld  liableforcontributoryorvicariousinfringement. $   OnJuly26,2000,thedistrictcourtissuedanopinionandordergrantinga H preliminaryinjunctionagainstNapster.Thedistrictcourtconcluded,interalia,that  l Napster'susersareengagedinextensivecopyrightinfringementandthatNapsteris @  contributorilyandvicariouslyliablefortheiractions.Thedistrictcourtdismissed d  Section1008as"irrelevanttotheinstantaction"becausetheplaintiffswerenot   seekingreliefundertheAHRA.ER04266(Opinionp.42n.19).     SUMMARYOFARGUMENT    6R  Section1008oftheAudioHomeRecordingActdoesnotprotectNapsterfrom H theplaintiffs'claimsofcopyrightinfringement.Section1008wasadoptedtoaddress l averydifferentphenomenon!thenoncommercialconsumeruseofdigitalaudio @ recordingdevices,suchasDATtapedecks,toperform"hometaping"ofmusical d recordings.Napster'sefforttobringitselfwithintheambitofSection1008floutsthe   termsofthestatuteandconflictswiththebasicpoliciesoftheAct. "   1. Section1008prohibitsactionsforcopyrightinfringementbasedon:(1)the $  manufacture,importation,ordistributionof"adigitalaudiorecordingdevice,a 'P"  digitalaudiorecordingmedium,ananalogrecordingdevice,orananalogrecording $)t$" medium";or(2)"thenoncommercialusebyaconsumerofsuchadeviceormedium H+&$ formakingdigitalmusicalrecordingsoranalogmusicalrecordings."Although  NapsterinsiststhattheactivitiesofitsusersareprotectedbySection1008,andthat $ itthereforecannotbeheldaccountableforcontributoryorvicariousinfringement H basedonthoseactivities,Napster'sdefensecannotpossiblybesquaredwiththeactual  l termsofSection1008. @    First,itisundisputedthatNapster'susersarenotusingany"device"or d  "medium"specifiedinSection1008,andSection1008appliesonlytoconsumeruse   of"suchadeviceormedium."Second,whenNapster'suserscreateandstorecopies  ofmusicfilesontheircomputers'harddisks,theyarenotmaking"digitalmusical   recordingsoranalogmusicalrecordings"asthosetermsaredefinedintheAct.Third, D Napster'susersareengagednotonlyincopyingmusicalrecordings,butalsoin h distributingsuchrecordingstothepublic,andSection1008immunizesonly < noncommercialcopying("noncommercialuse***formakingdigitalmusical ` recordingsoranalogmusicalrecordings"),notpublicdistribution.Fourth,unlike   suchcopyrightprovisionsasthefairuseprovision(17U.S.C.107),Section1008 " doesnotdesignateanyuseofcopyrightedworksasnoninfringing;itmerelybars $  "action[s]***alleginginfringement"basedonsuchuses.Assumingarguendothat &@"  Napster'susersareotherwiseengagedinactsofcopyrightinfringement,nothingin )d$" Section1008purportstorenderthoseactionsnoninfringing,andhencetheclaims 8+&$ againstNapsterforcontributoryandvicariousinfringementwouldremainunaffected  evenifSection1008didapplytoNapster'susers. $   2. TheAHRAwasintendedbyCongresstoembodyacompromisebetween H themusicindustryontheonehandandtheconsumerelectronicsindustryand ( x consumergroupsontheother.Attheheartofthatcompromiseisaquidproquo:in L  exchangeforallowingnoncommercialconsumeruseofdigitalaudiorecording p  technology(Section1008),themusicindustryreceivesfinancialcompensation   (Sections10031007)andprotectionagainstserialcopying(Section1002).  PermittingNapstertoshelteritselfbehindSection1008woulddefeatthisbasic , statutoryquidproquo:Napster'suserswouldbepermittedtoengageindigital P copyingandpublicdistributionofcopyrightedworksonascalebeggaringanything $t CongresscouldhaveimaginedwhenitenactedtheAct,yetthemusicindustrywould H receivenothinginreturnbecausetheproductsusedbyNapsteranditsusers l (computersandharddrives)areunquestionablynotsubjecttotheAct'sroyaltyand   serialcopyingprovisions. "   Napsterassertsthat,despitetheprecisionofthelanguageinSection1008, $(  Congressactuallymeanttoprovideimmunityforallnoncommercialconsumer &L"  copyingofmusicindigitaloranalogform,whetherornotthecopyingfitswithinthe  )p$" termsofSection1008.NothinginthelegislativehistoryoftheActsupports_that D+&$ argument.Andnothingin_RIAA_v.DiamondMultimediaSystemsInc.,180F.3d1072  (9thCir.1999),thedecisiononwhichNapsterplacesprincipalreliance,supportsthe $ argumenteither.Section1008wasnotatissueinDiamondMultimedia,andnowhere H doesthecaseholdthatSection1008providesthekindofomnibusimmunityfor  l digitalcopyingthatNapsterinvokeshere. @    ARGUMENT  d  \g   SECTION1008OFTHEAUDIOHOMERECORDINGACTOF1992   DOESNOTEXCUSENAPSTERFROMLIABILITYFOR   COPYRIGHTINFRINGEMENT   gg  NapsterassertsthatSection1008oftheAudioHomeRecordingActprovides * itsuserswithimmunityfromliabilityforcopyrightinfringementand,insodoing, N relievesNapsteritselffromanyderivativeliabilityforcontributoryorvicarious "r infringement.Thedistrictcourtwascorrecttorejectthatdefense.Napster's F invocationofSection1008isflatlyinconsistentwiththetermsofthestatuteandthe j legislativepoliciesthatunderlietheAHRA.Accordingly,ifNapsterisotherwise   liableunderthecopyrightlaws,Section1008doesnotrelieveNapsterofliability.  %  1       "  A.0  Napster'sImmunityDefenseIsForeclosedbythePlainLanguageof  Section1008 (#(# k  "The'startingpointforinterpretingastatuteisthelanguageofthestatute : itself.'"ExxonMobilCorp.v.UnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency,217  ^ F.3d1246,1249(9thCir.2000)(quotingConsumerProductSafetyCommissionv. 2  GTESylvania,Inc.,447U.S.102,108(1980)).Napster'sdiscussionofSection1008 V  isnotablyselectiveaboutfollowingthisrule.Napstercorrectlypointsoutthatthe z  introductorylanguageofSection1008!"[n]oactionmaybebroughtunderthistitle   alleginginfringementofcopyright"!makesSection1008potentiallyapplicableto  anyinfringementactionunderTitle17,notjustanactionundertheAHRAitself.But 6 NapsterconspicuouslyfailstoaddresstheremaininglanguageofSection1008,and  Z makesnoefforttoexplainhowthatlanguagecanbereadtoprotectNapster'susers .~ orNapsteritself. R   Napster'sreluctancetocometogripswiththestatutorylanguageisunder v standable,becausetheactivitiesofNapster'susersdonotevenarguablycomewithin ! thetermsofthestatute.NotonlydoesthelanguageofSection1008foreclose # Napster'simmunitydefense,butitdoessoinfourseparateandindependentways. %2! Napster'sargumentthusdependsonawholesaledisregardofwhatSection1008  actuallysays. $  1.0  Napster'sUsersAreNotUsingAnyofthe"Devices"or"Media"Covered H by_Section_Ԁ1008  \(#(# s  Section1008identifiesfourspecifickindsofproductswhosemanufacture, 2  distribution,andnoncommercialuseCongresswishedtoshieldfromactionsfor V  copyrightinfringement.Thoseproductsare"[1]adigitalaudiorecordingdevice,[2] z  adigitalaudiorecordingmedium,[3]ananalogrecordingdevice,or[4]ananalog   recordingmedium."17U.S.C.1008.Section1008prohibitsactionsforcopyright  infringementbasedon"themanufacture,importation,ordistribution"ofthesefour 6 typesofdevicesandmedia.Section1008alsoprohibitsactionsforcopyright  Z infringementbasedon"thenoncommercialusebyaconsumerofsuchadeviceor .~ medium"formakingdigitaloranalogmusicalrecordings. R   NothinginthelanguageofSection1008purportstograntmanufacturers, v distributors,orconsumersanyimmunitywithrespecttoproductsotherthanthe ! devicesandmediaspecifiedinSection1008itself.Tothecontrary,ifanactionfor # infringementdoesnotinvolvethespecifieddevicesormedia,itfallsoutsidethe %2! scopeofSection1008altogether.Byitsterms,Section1008protectsconsumersonly (V#! frominfringementactionsthatarebasedon"noncommercialuse***ofsucha **z%# deviceormedium"(emphasisadded).Ifaninfringementactionrestsonconsumer  useofotherproducts,Section1008onitsfacehasnoapplicabilitytosuchanaction. $   Inthiscase,theplaintiffs'copyrightclaimsarenotbasedontheuseofanyof H thedevicesormediacoveredbythetermsofSection1008.Napster'susersexchange  l musicbyusingpersonalcomputerstolocateandtransferfilesfromonecomputer @  harddisktoanother.Neitherapersonalcomputernoritsharddiskconstitutes"a d  digitalaudiorecordingdevice,adigitalaudiorecordingmedium,ananalogrecording   device,orananalogrecordingmedium."Napsteritselfdoesnotsuggestotherwise.    Theterms"digitalaudiorecordingdevice"and"digitalaudiorecording   medium"arespecificallydefinedintheAct.A"digitalaudiorecordingdevice"is D defined,withexceptionsnotrelevanthere,asanymachineordevice"thedigital h recordingfunctionofwhichisdesignedormarketedfortheprimarypurposeof,and < thatiscapableof,makingadigitalaudiocopiedrecordingforprivateuse."17U.S.C. ` 1001(3)(emphasisadded).A"digitalaudiorecordingmedium"isdefined(again   withinapplicableexceptions)as"anymaterialobject***thatisprimarilymarketed " ormostcommonlyusedbyconsumersforthepurposeofmakingdigitalaudiocopied $  recordingsbyuseofadigitalaudiorecordingdevice."Id.1001(4)(A)(emphasis &@"   added). )d$"   ThisCourthasalreadyheldthatthestatutorydefinitionof"digitalaudio   recordingdevice"doesnotreachpersonalcomputersandtheirharddrives.RIAAv. $ DiamondMultimediaSystemsInc.,180F.3d1072,1078(9thCir.1999).Although H personalcomputersare"capableof"making"digitalaudiocopiedrecordings,"neither  l theynortheirharddrivesare"designedormarketedfortheprimarypurposeof" @  makingsuchrecordings.Ibid.Forsimilarreasons,harddrivesfalloutsidethe d  statutorydefinitionof"digitalaudiorecordingmedium,"sincetheyarenot"primarily   marketedormostcommonlyused***forthepurposeof"makingsuchrecordings.    Unlike"digitalaudiorecordingdevice"and"digitalaudiorecordingmedium,"   theterms"analogrecordingdevice"and"analogrecordingmedium"arenotexpressly D definedintheAct.Congresspresumablyhadinmindtheanalogcounterpartsto h digitalaudiorecordingdevicesandmedia!forexample,traditionalanalogtape < decksandanalogrecordingtapes.Whatevertheprecisescopeoftheseterms, ` however,theycannotencompasspersonalcomputersandtheirharddrives,because   computersprocessandstoreinformationindigitalratherthananalogform.Thus, " Napsterusersarenotevenarguablyusinganyofthedevicesandmediareferredto $  inSection1008.  &@"   2.0  Napster'sUsersAreNotMaking"DigitalMusicalRecordings"Or  "AnalogMusicalRecordings" (#(#   Section1008protectsthenoncommercialconsumeruseofdigitalandanalog < recordingdevicesandmediaformaking"digitalmusicalrecordingsoranalog  ` musicalrecordings."17U.S.C.1008.EvenifNapster'suserswereusingthe 4  specifieddevicesormedia,theyarenotmaking"digitalmusicalrecordings"or X  "analogmusicalrecordings."TheiractivitiesfalloutsidethescopeofSection1008 |  forthatreasonaswell.     TheActdefinesa"digitalmusicalrecording"as"amaterialobject***in  whicharefixed,inadigitalrecordingformat,onlysounds,andmaterial,statements, 8 orinstructionsincidentaltothosefixedsounds,ifany***."17U.S.C.  \ 1001(5)(A)(i)(emphasisadded).Thedefinitiongoesontoexclude,amongother 0 things,"amaterialobject***inwhichoneormorecomputerprogramsarefixed T ***."Id.1001(5)(B)(ii). x   Napster'suserscopymusicfilestotheircomputers'harddrives.Harddrives ! storedataofallkinds,fromwordprocessingfilestomultimediafiles,andthey # ordinarilystorecomputerprogramsaswell.Asaresult,harddrivesfalloutsidethe %4! statutorydefinitionof"digitalmusicalrecording"intworespects:first,theyarenot (X#! objectsinwhich"onlysounds"are"fixed,"andsecond,theyareobjectsinwhich ,*|%# "oneormorecomputerprogramsarefixed."SeeDiamondMultimedia,180F.3dat  1076("aharddriveisamaterialobjectinwhichoneormoreprogramsarefixed; $ thus,aharddriveisexcludedfromthedefinitionofdigitalmusicalrecordings"). H   Unlike"digitalmusicalrecording,""analogmusicalrecording"isnotadefined  l termundertheAct.However,justasacomputer'sharddrivecannotbean"analog @  recordingmedium"(seep.15supra),neithercanitbe(orbeusedtostore)an"analog d  musicalrecording,"becauseharddrivesstoredataindigitalratherthananalogform.   Thus,Napster'suserscannotbeclaimedtobemakingeither"digitalmusical  recordings"or"analogmusicalrecordings"!andifaconsumerisnotmakinga   digitaloranalogmusicalrecording,thetermsofSection1008donotprovidehim D withanyimmunity. h  3.0  Section1008ProvidesImmunityOnlyforNoncommercialCopying,Not < forPublicDistribution P(#(#   TheCopyrightActgrantstheownerofacopyrightanumberofdistinctlegal x rights.See17U.S.C.106(1)(5).Themostwidelyknownrightistherightof ! reproduction!the"exclusiveright***toreproducethecopyrightedworkincopies # orphonorecords."Id.106(1).However,theCopyrightActalsograntsthecopy %4!  rightholderaseparateanddistinctrightofpublicdistribution!the"exclusiveright (X#! ***todistributecopiesorphonorecordsofthecopyrightedworktothepublicby  saleorothertransferofownership,orbyrental,lease,orlending."Id.106(3). $    Theplaintiffsassertnotonlyinfringementsontherightofreproduction,but H alsoinfringementsontherightofpublicdistribution.Intheproceedingsbelow,  l Napsterstatedthatithasatleast20millionusers,allofwhomareabletouse @  Napster'sservicetoaccessanddownloadmusicfilescontainingcopyrightedsound d  recordings.WhenaNapsterusermakesthemusicfilesonhisorherharddrive   availablefordownloadingbyotherNapsterusers,heorsheisdistributingthefiles  tothepublicatlarge.Cf.Michaelsv.InternetEntertainmentGroup,Inc.,5F.Supp.   2d823,83031(C.D.Cal.1998);PlayboyEnterprises,Inc.v.Webbworld,Inc.,991 D F.Supp.543,551(N.D.Tex.1997),_aff'd_Ԁmem.,168F.3d486(5thCir.1999)500; h _Marobie_-Fl,Inc.v.Nat'lAss'nofFireandEquip.DistributorsandNorthwestNexus, < Inc. , 983F.Supp.1167,1173(N.D.Ill.1997)#050Y#. `   TotheextentthatNapsterusersareengagedinthedistributionofcopyrighted   workstothepublicatlarge,suchactivityfallsoutsidethescopeofSection1008. " ThelanguageofSection1008isdirectedatusesthatinfringeontherightof $(  reproduction,notatusesthatinfringeontherightofpublicdistribution.Byitsterms, &L"  Section1008onlybarsinfringementactions"basedonthenoncommercialuse"ofthe  )p$" specifiedproducts"formakingdigitalmusicalrecordingsoranalogmusical D+&$ recordings"!inotherwords,formakingcopiesofthemusic.Section1008makes  noreference,andprovidesnopossibledefense,toinfringementclaimsbasedonthe $ publicdistributionofcopiedworks.Thus,evenifitwerepropertotreattheuseof H Napster'sserviceforthepublicdisseminationofcopyrightedmusicasa  l "noncommercial"consumeruse,whichisfarfromclear,itisnottheuseatwhichthe @  termsofSection1008aredirected!the"making[of]digitalmusicalrecordingsor d  analogmusicalrecordings."/ %  2          4.0  Section1008DoesNotTransformInfringingConsumerUsesIntoNon  InfringingOnes (#(#   Astheforegoingdiscussionshows,thelanguageofSection1008cannotbe 6 readtoencompasstheactivitiesofNapster'susers.ButevenifSection1008did  Z applytoNapster'susers,itwouldnotprovideNapsteritselfwithadefensetoliability .~ forcontributoryorvicariousinfringement.ThatisbecausethetermsofSection1008 R addressonlywhetherconsumerscanbesuedforinfringement;nothinginSection v 1008addressesorchangeswhethertheyareengagedininfringement. !   WhenCongresshaschosentomakeparticularusesofcopyrightedworksnon  infringing,ittraditionallyhassaidsoexpressly.Forexample,thefairuseprovision $ oftheCopyrightActprovidesthat"thefairuseofacopyrightedwork***isnotan H infringementofcopyright."17U.S.C.107(emphasisadded).Congresshasspoken  l withequalclarityregardingotheruses.See,e.g.,id.108("itisnotaninfringement @  ofcopyright"forlibraryorarchivetoreproducesinglecopiesofworksunder d  specifiedconditions);id.110(specifiedperformancesanddisplaysofworks"are   notinfringementsofcopyright");id.117("itisnotaninfringement"forownerof  copyofcomputerprogramtomakeanadditionalcopyfor,interalia,archival   purposes). D   Incontrast,Section1008oftheAHRAconspicuouslydoesnotsaythatthe h activitiesitdescribes"arenotaninfringementofcopyright."Instead,Section1008 < providesonlythat"[n]oactionmaybebroughtunderthistitlealleginginfringement ` ofcopyright"basedonsuchactivities.Thelegislativerecordindicatesthatthis   languagereflectsadeliberatedecisionbyCongresstorelieveconsumersfromthe " threatofcopyrightliabilitywithoutalteringtheunderlyingcontoursofthecopyright $  lawsorresolvingthelegaldebateoverthelegalityofhometaping.Inthewordsof &@"   theSenateReport 0: )d$" 8  &   [S]ection1002[nowSection1008]providesonlythatcertaincopyright  infringementactionsareprecluded.Thesectiondoesnotpurportto  resolve,nordoesitresolve,whethertheunderlyingconductisorisnot $ infringement.Thecommitteeintendstheimmunityfromlawsuitsto 6 providefullprotectionagainstthespecifiedtypesofcopyright H infringementactions,butithasnotaddressedtheunderlyingcopyright  Z infringementissue***.c' l   SenateReportat52(emphasisadded). @    Thus,assumingforpresentpurposesthatNapster'susersareengagedin d  copyrightinfringement,theiractionswouldremaininfringingevenifSection1008   wereapplicabletothem,sinceSection1008doesnotpurporttoaddressthe  underlyingissueofinfringement.AndifSection1008doesnottransformthe   actionsofNapster'susersintononinfringinguses,thenitcannotprovideshelterto D Napsteritself.IninvokingSection1008,Napsterhasarguedthatitcannotbeliable h forcontributoryorvicariousinfringementifitsusersarenotthemselvesengaged < ininfringement.OnceitisrecognizedthatSection1008doesnotalterwhetherthe ` consumerusesthatitaddressesareinfringing,Napster'sargumentfallsapart.#0 .#    0    ItisnoteworthyinthisregardthatSection1008expresslyprovidesimmunity " notonlyforthespecifiednoncommercialconsumeruseofdigitalandanalog $  recordingdevicesandmedia,butalsoforthemanufactureanddistributionofsuch &@"  products.Napster'sargumentassumesthattheimmunityconferredonconsumers )d$" issufficientbyitselftoprecludeliabilityforcontributoryorvicariousinfringement 8+&$ onthepartofthefirmswhoseproductsarebeingused.Butifthatwerethecase,  thentherewouldhavebeennoreasonforCongresstoincludedistinctimmunity $ protectionformanufacturersinSection1008itself,andthemanufacturerimmunity H languageinSection1008wouldservenopurpose.Napster'sargumentthus#0 $##00C#00  l #00(#conflictswiththeelementaryprinciplethat"legislativeenactmentsshouldnotbe @  construedtorendertheirprovisionsmeresurplusage."Dunnv.CFTC,519U.S.465, d  472(1997).00 0ԀThefactthatCongressfounditnecessarytoextendanexpressstatutory   grantofimmunitytomanufacturers,aswellastoconsumers,confirmsthat  Congressdidnotregardconsumerimmunityfromsuitassufficientbyitselfto   insulateotherpartiesfromliabilityforcontributoryorvicariousinfringement. D #0 ##00e# B.0  Napster'sRelianceonSection1008IsInconsistentWiththePolicies h UnderlyingtheAHRA ,|(#(# {  InDiamondMultimedia,thisCourtobservedthatit"neednotresorttothe R legislativehistory[when]thestatutorylanguageisclear."180F.3dat1076.Given v theclaritywithwhichthelanguageofSection1008prescribes(andcircumscribes) ! thescopeofstatutoryimmunityundertheAHRA,andgivenNapster'smanifest # inabilitytobringthiscasewithinthelanguageofthestatute,resorttothelegislative %2! historyoftheAHRAisthereforeunnecessary.Nevertheless,ifrecourseishadtothe (V#! legislativehistory,itreinforcestheconclusionthatSection1008doesnotprotect **z%# Napster.FarfromadvancingthepoliciesoftheAHRA,Napster'sinvocationof  Section1008isdirectlycontrarytothosepolicies. $  1.0  Napster'sInvocationofSection1008UpsetstheQuidProQuo_That_ H UnderliestheAct  \(#(# ־  ThelegislativehistoryoftheAHRAmakesclearthattheActwasintendedby 2  Congresstoembodythecompromiseagreementreachedin1991betweenthemusic V  industryontheonehandandtheconsumerelectronicsindustryandconsumergroups z  ontheother.See,e.g.,SenateReportat34("thecompetingpartieshave,through   negotiationandcompromise,reachedanagreementwhichallpartiesinvolvedfeelis  equitable,"andthelegislation"reflectsthisagreement");HouseReportat13, 6 reprintedin1992USCCANat3583(theAct"preservestheessentialsofthe  Z agreement"). .~   Asexplainedabove,thecompromiseunderlyingtheActinvolvesabasicquid R proquo.Inexchangeforacceptingthemarketingofdigitalaudiorecording v technologyandtheuseofsuchtechnologyfornoncommercialhometaping,themusic ! industryreceivesfinancialcompensation(throughtheAct'sroyaltysystem)and #  protectionagainstserialcopying.Thisquidproquowascentraltotheagreementand %2! thelegislationthatembodiesit.See,e.g.,SenateReportat30(summarizingthe  purposeandbasicelementsofthelegislation).1 %  3       $    ConstruingSection1008toprotectNapsterwouldmeanrepudiating,rather H thanpreserving,thequidproquounderlyingtheAct.Ontheonehand,Napster  l wouldbepermittedtofacilitatethecopyinganddistributionofcopyrightedsound @  recordingsonascalefarsurpassingthe"hometaping"thatCongressforesawwhen d  itenactedtheAHRA.Ontheotherhand,theproductsemployedbyNapsterandits   users!computersandtheirharddrivesarenotsubjecttoroyaltypayments(by  Napsteroranyoneelse)andarenotrequiredtobeequippedwithantiserialcopying   circuitry,becausetheroyaltyandserialcopyingprovisionsoftheActapplyonlyto D "digitalaudiorecordingdevices"and"digitalaudiorecordingmedia,"andasshown h above,thosetermsexcludecomputersandharddrives.17U.S.C.1002(a), < 1003(a),1004;seep.15supra.Asaresult,themusicindustrywouldbearthe ` burdensofthestatutewithoutreceivingthecorrespondingbenefits.     ThelegislativehistorymakesclearthattheAct'sexclusionofcomputersand  harddriveswastheproductofadeliberatechoicebyCongress.See,e.g.,Senate $ Reportat48("apersonalcomputerwhoserecordingfunctionisdesignedand H marketedprimarilyfortherecordingofdataandcomputerprograms***would  l [not]qualifyasa'digitalaudiorecordingdevice'").IninvokingSection1008, @  NapsterisinvitingthisCourttocountermandthatlegislativechoice,andtodosoin d  awaythatundoesthereciprocalnatureoftheAct'sdigitalrecordingprovisions.That   invitationshouldbedeclined.   2.0  Section1008WasNotIntendedToImmunizeAllConsumerCopyingof   MusicalRecordings 4(#(#   Section1008identifieswithprecisiontheconsumeractivitythatCongress  Z meanttoshelterfromcopyrightinfringementsuits:"thenoncommercialusebya .~ consumerofsuchadeviceormediumformakingdigitalmusicalrecordingsoranalog R musicalrecordings."17U.S.C.1008.Despitetheprecisionofthislanguage, v NapsterassertsthatCongressactuallyintendedtoimmunize"allnoncommercial ! consumercopyingofmusicindigitaloranalogform"(NapsterBriefat20),whether # ornotthecopyingcomeswithinthetermsofSection1008.ButNapsterhas %2! identifiednothinginthelimitedlegislativehistoryofSection1008thatsupportsthis (V#! argumentorovercomestheexplicitlanguageofthestatute. **z%#   ThefollowingpassagefromtheHouseReportontheActisrepresentativeof  thelegislativehistoryregardingSection1008: $ 8  &  Section1008coversoneofthecriticalcomponentsofthelegislation: H exemptionsfromliabilityforsuitundertitle17forhometapingof  Z copyrightedmusicalworksandsoundrecordings,andforcontributory  l infringementactionsundertitle17againstmanufacturers,importers,and . ~ distributorsofdigitalandanalogrecordingdevicesandrecordingmedia. @  Inthecaseofhometaping,theexemptionprotectsallnoncommercial R  copyingbyconsumersofdigitalandanalogmusicalrecordings. d  Manufacturers,importers,anddistributorsofdigitalandanalog v  recordingdevicesandmediahaveacompleteexemptionfromcopyright   infringementclaimsbasedonthemanufacture,importation,or   distributionofsuchdevices.'    HouseReportat24,reprintedin1992USCCANat3594(emphasisadded).     Thehighlightedreferencesto"hometaping"suggest,notsurprisingly,that D CongressmeanttoaddresstheproblemthatgaverisetotheAHRA!theintroduction h anduseofDATtapedecksandsimilardigitaltapingtechnology(seepp.35supra). < ThereisnoindicationthatCongressalsomeanttocoverotherkindsofdevicesand ` mediathatfalloutsidethetermsofSection1008.Tothecontrary,thelegislative   historyreiteratesthemessageconveyedbythelanguageofthestatuteitself:Congress " meantto"extend[]protectiontousersofsuchaudiorecordingdevicesandmediaby $  prohibitingcopyrightinfringementactionsbasedontheuseofsuchdevicesand &@"   media"tomakemusicalrecordings.SenateReportat51(emphasisadded).Inshort, )d$" thelegislativehistoryconfirmsthatCongressmeantwhatitsaidinSection1008!  andwhatCongresssaidcannotbereconciledwithwhatNapsterisseeking. $  3.TheLegislativeHistoryofStatutesOtherThantheAHRAisIrrelevant  H   InconstruingthescopeofSection1008,Napsterattemptstorelyonthe  p legislativehistoryoftwostatutesotherthantheAHRA!theRecordRental D  AmendmentActof1984andtheComputerSoftwareRentalAmendmentActof1990. h  SeeNapsterBriefat2324.NapsterarguesthatCongress'streatmentof"commercial"   lendingofphonorecordsandcomputersoftwareunderthosetwostatutesisconsistent  withNapster'sreadingofSection1008.Theshortansweristhatthiscaseinvolves $ themeaningoftheAHRA,notthemeaningofotherstatutes.Napster'sinvocation H ofSection1008cannotbesustainedonthebasisofSection1008'sownlanguageand l legislativehistory;afortiori,itcannotbesustainedbyresorttothelanguageand @ legislativehistoryofunrelatedstatutes.TheRecordRentalAmendmentActandthe d ComputerSoftwareRentalAmendmentActwerebothenactedpriortotheAHRA,   andtheyaddressentirelydifferentsubjects.Neithertheirlanguagenortheir " legislativehistorypurportstoaddressthemeaningofSection1008inanyway.  $   C.0  DiamondMultimedia_Does_ԀNotResolvetheAHRAImmunityQuestionAt  IssueinThisCase(#(#  f  NapstersuggeststhatthisCourt'sdecisioninDiamondMultimediaconfirms : Napster'sreadingofSection1008.Itdoesnot.Themeaningandapplicabilityof  ^ Section1008werenotatissueinDiamondMultimedia,andnothingthattheCourt 2  decidedinDiamondMultimediainanywayrequirestheCourttoacceptNapster's V  Section1008defenseinthiscase. z    DiamondMultimediainvolvedasuitundertheAHRAbytherecording   industryagainstthemanufactureroftheRioportablemusicplayer,a"Walkmanlike"  devicethatplaysMP3musicfiles.TherecordingindustryclaimedthattheRioplayer 6 isa"digitalaudiorecordingdevice"andthereforeissubjecttotheAct'sroyaltyand  Z serialcopyingprovisions.Basedonthatclaim,therecordingindustrysoughtto .~ enjointhemanufactureanddistributionoftheRioplayerandtocompelRio's R manufacturer(Diamond)tomakeroyaltypaymentsundertheAct.ThisCourt v rejectedtheindustryclaim,holdingthattheRioplayerdoesnotcomewithintheAct's ! definitionofa"digitalaudiorecordingdevice"andthereforeisnotsubjecttothe # Act'sroyaltyandserialcopyingrequirements.180F.3dat10751081. %2!   DiamondMultimediawasnotanactionforcopyrightinfringement.Because (V#! Section1008oftheAHRAappliesonlyto"action[s]***underthistitlealleging **z%# infringementofcopyright,"itwasfaciallyirrelevanttoDiamond'sliability,and  DiamondneverinvokedSection1008asadefense.Accordingly,theCourtwasnot $ calledontodecidewhetherSection1008protectedDiamonditself,muchless H whetherorhowSection1008mayprotectdefendantsinothercasesthat(unlike  l DiamondMultimedia)involveclaimsofcopyrightinfringement. @    NapsterreliesonasinglepassagefromtheCourt'sopinioninDiamond d  Multimedia:   8  AstheSenateReportexplains,"[t]hepurposeof[theAct]istoensure  therightofconsumerstomakeanalogordigitalaudiorecordingsof  copyrightedmusicfortheirprivate,noncommercialuse."S.Rep.102   294,at*86(emphasisadded).TheActdoessothroughitshometaping 2 exemption,see17U.S.C.1008,which"protectsallnoncommercial D copyingbyconsumersofdigitalandanalogmusicalrecordings,"H.R. V Rep.102873(I),at*59.h   180F.3dat1079(emphasisinoriginal). <   TotheextentthatthispassagespeakstothemeaningofSection1008,itisno ` morethandictum,sinceSection1008wasnotatissueinthecase.Inanyevent,   nothinginthepassageisinanywayinconsistentwiththepropositionthatSection " 1008meanswhatitsays.ThepassagemerelyquotesexcerptsfromtheHouseand $  SenateReportsregardingthepurposeoftheActingeneralandSection1008in &@"  particular.Asshownabove,whenthelegislativehistoryisconsideredinitsentirety, )d$" itdirectlysupports,ratherthanrefutes,theconclusionthatSection1008doesnot 8+&$ protectNapsteroritsusers.Accordingly,nothinginDiamondMultimediaprovides  refugeforNapsterinthiscase. $   CONCLUSION  H   Fortheforegoingreasons,thedistrictcourt'sholdingthatSection1008ofthe  p AudioHomeRecordingActdoesnotexcuseNapsterfromliabilityiscorrectand D  shouldbeaffirmed. h     `     h     Respectfullysubmitted,   DAVIDO.CARSON0  0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#DAVIDW.OGDEN(#(# ЀGeneralCounsel0 0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#AssistantAttorneyGeneral(#(# J.KENT_DUNLAP_0  0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#MARKB.STERN6(#(#    `     h     SCOTTR._McINTOSH_ H UnitedStatesCopyrightOffice0 h 0h(#h(#0(#(#Attorneys,AppellateStaff Z(#(# LibraryofCongress l 101IndependenceAve._S.E._ h     CivilDivision,DepartmentofJustice .~ Washington,D.C.205400   h 0(#(#  601DStreet_N.W._,Room95500@ (#(#0@ p(#p(#0@ (#(#@(#(#    ` 0 0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#Washington,D.C.20520R(#(# _ALBIN_ԀF._DROST_ d ЀActingGeneralCounsel h     CounselfortheUnitedStates v JUSTINHUGHES ! UnitedStatesPatentandTrademarkOffice # P.O.Box15667 $  Arlington,VA22215 %2! OfCounsel (V#! September8,2000  *2&$    8X XdX Xd8CERTIFICATEOFCOMPLIANCE     PursuanttoFed.R.App.P.29(d)andNinthCircuitRule321,Icertifythatthe { attachedamicusbriefisproportionatelyspaced,hasatypefaceof14pointsormore  andcontains7000wordsorless.   0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#0p(#(#_________________________ [ p(#p(# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#0p(#(#ScottR.McIntoshm p(#p(#    CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE  S g  IcertifythatonSeptember8,2000,IfiledandservedtheforegoingBRIEF { FORTHEUNITEDSTATESASAMICUSCURIAEbycausinganoriginaland15  copiestobefiledwiththeClerkoftheCourtbyovernightmailandbycausingcopies  tobeservedonthefollowingcounselbyovernightmailand(whereindicated)byfax: 7 X X0CareyR.Ramos  [ _Aidan_Ԁ_Synnott_ G MichaelKeats 3 PaulWeissRifkindWharton&Garrison   1285AvenueoftheAmericas !  NewYork,NY10019-6064 " (212)373-3000 # (OVERNIGHTMAILANDFAX) $ RussellJ._Frackman_ W&!! JeffreyD.Goldman C'"" GeorgeM._Borkowski_ /(## DrewE._Breuder_ )k$$ Mitchell_Silberberg_Ԁ&_Knupp_ *W%% 11377WOlympicBlvd *C&& LosAngeles,CA90064 +/'' (310)312-2000 ,(( (OVERNIGHTMAILANDFAX) -)) ЇWilliamM.Hart  EricJ.German  FrankP._Schibilia_  CarlaM.Miller t HankL.Goldsmith ` LeonP.Gold L  LawrenceL.Weinstein 8  _Proskauer_ԀRose_LLP_ $ t 1585Broadway  ` NewYork,NY10036  L  (212)969-3000  8  HadrianR.Katz   (202)942-5000   Arnold&Porter   555TwelfthStreet,NW   Washington,DC20004 p StevenB._Fabrizio_ H 1330ConnecticutAvenue,_N.W._ 4 Suite300  p Washington,DC20036  \ 202-775-0101 H LisaM._Arent_   _Melinda_ԀM.Morton   MichaelA._Brille_  SamuelA.Kaplan  WilliamJackson  SethA.Goldberg l _Fenwick_Ԁ&West_LLP_ X  TwoPaloAltoSqSte800 D! PaloAlto,CA94306 0"  650-494-0600 #l! (BYOVERNIGHTMAILANDFAX) $X" LaurenceF._Pulgram_ %0!$ KathrynJ.Fritz &"% _Fenwick_Ԁ&West_LLP_ '#& 275BatteryStreet (#' 15thFloor )$( SanFrancisco,CA94111 |*%) 415-875-2300 h+&* (BYOVERNIGHTMAILANDFAX) T,'+  @-(, David_Boies_  _Boies_Ԁ_Schiller_Ԁ&_Flexner_Ԁ_LLP_  80BusinessParkDrive  Suite110 t Armonk,NY10504 ` (914)273-9800 L  (BYOVERNIGHTMAILANDFAX) 8  AlbertP._Bedecarre_  ` QuinnEmanuel_Urquhart_ԀOliver&  L  Hedges,_LLP_  8  2479EastBayshoreRoad $  Suite820   PaloAlto,CA94303   650-494-3900   HannahBentley p 394ScenicAvenue \ San_Anselmo_,CA94960#0 XXQ# H    `     h      p _________________________ j    `     h      p ScottR.McIntosh