Broadcast Music, Inc. v. U.S. Shoe Corp., 81-5162

Citation678 F.2d 816
Decision Date02 June 1982
Docket NumberNo. 81-5162,81-5162
Parties, 1982 Copr.L.Dec. P 25,410 BROADCAST MUSIC, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. The UNITED STATES SHOE CORPORATION, a corporation of Ohio, and U. S. Specialty Retailing, Inc., a corporation of Ohio, doing business as Casual Corner, Defendants-Appellants.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)

R. O. Klausmeyer, Frost & Jacobs, Cincinnati, Ohio, for defendants-appellants.

Peter C. Smoot, Beverly Hills, Cal., argued, for plaintiff-appellee; Kaplan, Livingston, Goodwin, Berkowitz & Selvin, Beverly Hills, Cal., on brief.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Before GOODWIN and TANG, Circuit Judges, and SOLOMON, * Senior District Judge.

SOLOMON, District Judge:

This is an appeal from a grant of summary judgment against appellants (Casual Corner) for infringement of public performance rights belonging to Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI).

Appellants operate a chain of more than 600 women's retail apparel stores under the name Casual Corner. In many of their stores, regular radio broadcasts were played to the public through the use of a single radio receiver connected to four or more speakers mounted on the store ceiling. These radio programs included copyrighted songs. BMI is the licensee of the public performance rights for many of the songs which were played over these facilities without BMI's permission.

BMI filed an action against appellants for money damages and injunctive relief for the unauthorized public performance of copyrighted music in four Casual Corner stores. In response to BMI's motion for summary judgment, appellants contended that they did not infringe BMI's copyright because the music they played was transmitted over "a single receiving apparatus of a kind commonly used in private homes," performance authorized by 17 U.S.C. § 110(5).

The district court granted BMI's motion for summary judgment.

Copyright owners have exclusive rights to perform or authorize the performance of their copyrighted works. 17 U.S.C. § 106(4). In Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S. 151, 95 S.Ct. 2040, 45 L.Ed.2d 84 (1975), the Supreme Court held that a small fast-food shop of 1055 square feet in which radio programs were played by means of a radio receiver and four speakers was exempt under the existing (1909) copyright laws.

In 1976, primarily as a result of this decision, Congress enacted Section 110 (17 U.S.C. § 110) to limit the exemption from rights granted copyright owners under Section 106.

Section 110 exempts:

(5) communication of a transmission embodying a performance or display of a work by the public reception of the transmission on a single receiving apparatus of a kind commonly used in private homes, unless-

(A) a direct charge is made to see or hear the transmission; or

(B) the transmission thus received is further transmitted to the public ...

The legislative history of Section 110(5) shows that Congress expressly considered the Aiken decision and regarded Aiken as the "outer limit" of the exemption under the new law. H.Rep.No.94-1476, 94th Cong., 2d Sess., 87 (1976), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 1976, p. 5659. 1 Casual Corner exceeds this limit, because each store has a commercial monaural system, with widely separated speakers of a type not commonly used in private homes, and the size and nature of the operation justifies the use of a commercial background music system.

In Sailor Music v. Gap Stores, Inc., 516 F.Supp. 923 (S.D.N.Y.1981) Judge Gagliardi, in a careful and well-reasoned opinion on...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Merrill v. County Stores, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Hampshire
    • September 17, 1987
    ...a kind commonly used in private homes" as required by the statutory language of section 110(5). See Broadcast Music, Inc. v. United States Shoe Corp., 678 F.2d at 816, 817-18 (9th Cir.1982) hereinafter "BMI v. U.S. Shoe"; Rodgers v. Eighty Four Lumber Co., 617 F.Supp. 1021, 1023 (W.D.Pa.198......
  • Hickory Grove Music v. Andrews
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Montana
    • September 13, 1990
    ...grouped within a relatively narrow circumference —as "the outer limit" of the "home-system defense." Broadcast Music, Inc. v. United States Shoe Corp., 678 F.2d 816, 817 (9th Cir.1982) (citing H.R.Rep. No. 94-1476, 94th Cong., 2d Sess. 86-87, reprinted in, 1976 U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News a......
  • Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Jeep Sales & Service Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Virginia
    • October 18, 1990
    ...F.2d 375 (7th Cir.1988); Broadcast Music, Inc. v. United States Shoe Corp., 211 U.S.P.Q. 43, 1980 WL 1178 (C.D.Cal.1980), aff'd, 678 F.2d 816 (9th Cir. 1982); Sailor Music v. Gap Stores, Inc., 668 F.2d 84, 85-86 (2d Cir.1981); but see Springsteen v. Plaza Roller Dome, Inc., 602 F.Supp. 1113......
  • Edison Bros. Stores, Inc. v. Broadcast Music, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • January 13, 1992
    ...110(5). There is no indication of the source of the information in the Sailor opinion.6 See, e.g., Broadcast Music, Inc. v. United States Shoe Corp., 678 F.2d 816 (9th Cir.1982) (square footage of the defendant stores was not even mentioned); Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Jeep Sales & Serv. Co.,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT