- 41 -
from the OEM’s and CFC’s were for various types of intellectual
property, the payment for rights other than copyrights was de
minimis.
In light of our holding above that computer software masters do
not fall within the parenthetical, we conclude that it is not
necessary to decide this issue.
(2) Petitioner maintains that we should interpret the
parenthetical in the same manner as the Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit (the court to which an appeal in this case would lie)
interpreted the phrase “books, magazines, periodicals, films, video
tapes, or other matter” for purposes of 18 U.S.C. sec. 2252(a)(4)(B)
in United States v. Lacy, 119 F.3d 742 (9th Cir. 1997). In that
case, the Court of Appeals interpreted “other matter” as follows:
“matter” is the physical medium that contains the visual
depiction–-in this case, the hard drive of Lacy’s computer
and the disks found in his apartment. * * * “* * * a word
is understood by the associated words, * * * a general
term following more specific terms means that the things
embraced in the general term are the same kind as those
denoted by the specific terms.” * * * Here, the word
“matter” appears at the end of the list “books, magazines,
periodicals, films, [and] video tapes,” all of which are
physical media capable of containing images. [Citations
omitted.]
Id. at 748.
Lacy was a criminal case. The issue involved therein was
whether an individual computer graphics file is “other matter”
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. sec. 2252(a)(4)(B). The defendant was charged
with possessing child pornography; he had downloaded computerized
Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011