Macrovision v. Sima
In 2005, Macrovision sued Sima to block the sale of the Sima CopyThis! (CT-1, CT-Q1, CT-100, CT-2, CT-200) and GoDVD (SCC, and SCC-2) products, which are designed to digitize analog video, such as the analog video outputs of DVD players and analog VCRs. The Macrovision Analog Copy Protection (ACP) signals often embedded in these analog outputs, however, do not survive the digitizing process, and therefore are not embedded in the outputs of the Sima devices. Macrovision argued that this violates both Macrovision's patents and the DMCA's prohibition on circumvention.
In April 2006, the district court agreed with Macrovision and issued a preliminary injunction against Sima. The court amended and refined its ruling in May 2006. Sima appealed the ruling.
In the appeal, EFF joined the CEA, HRRC, library associations, and CCIA in filing an amicus brief on behalf of Sima arguing that digital devices that ignore and remove Macrovision signals do not violate the DMCA, both because Macrovision's ACP technologies do not qualify for protection under the DMCA and because Sima's devices do not "circumvent" within the meaning of the DMCA.
Unfortunately, Sima and Macrovision settled their dispute before the appeal could be decided, leaving for another day the important question of whether Macrovision's analog signals qualify for DMCA protection.