FIXING RAM COPIES

Because copies are no longer capable of simple and uncontroversial definition, copyright law often lacks the facility to determine whether a copy exists. Courts, chief among them the Ninth Circuit in MAI Systems Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc., have largely adopted a broad and inclusive RAM copy doctrine that treats all temporary digital instantiations as copies under the Copyright Act.6 Scholars, however, have criticized the logical underpinnings and policy implications of Peak with striking consistency.7 The Second Circuit's recent decision in Cartoon Network v. CSC Holdings, which held that CSC did not create copies when it buffered segments of television programs,8 promises not only to reignite the longstanding controversy over the RAM copy doctrine, but also to reframe a debate that has ossified over the past two decades.