## Facts

- Goldstein and others operated a commercial duplication business that copied and sold musical sound recordings without authorization.
- From about April 1970 to March 1971, they bought lawful recordings, duplicated the recorded sounds onto blank media, packaged the copies, and sold them to the public for profit.
- California Penal Code § 653h criminalized knowingly transferring recorded sounds to another article for sale or profit without the owner’s consent.
- At the time, federal copyright law did not provide copyright protection for sound recordings as such.
- Petitioners argued the statute effectively created a state copyright of unlimited duration and was invalid under the Copyright Clause and federal preemption principles.

## Issues

1. Whether the Copyright Clause exclusively vests in Congress the power to grant copyright protection, barring state protection for categories not covered by federal statute.
2. Whether California’s anti-piracy statute was preempted under the Supremacy Clause by federal copyright law.
3. Whether the Copyright Clause’s “limited Times” language imposes a durational limit on state protection, making indefinite state protection unconstitutional.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and upheld the California statute.
- The Court held the Copyright Clause does not, by its text or necessary implication, grant Congress exclusive authority over all copyright-like protection.
- The Court held the statute was not preempted because federal copyright law had not displaced state regulation of sound recordings fixed before federal protection applied.
- The Court held the “limited Times” restriction constrains Congress’s copyright power, not state police-power measures like California’s criminal anti-piracy law.
- The Court noted that federal statutory protection for sound recordings enacted in 1971 applied prospectively and did not alter the legal status of recordings fixed before February 15, 1972.

## Legal Principles

- States may protect categories of creative works that federal copyright law does not cover, absent clear congressional displacement.
- Federal copyright statutes do not automatically preempt state laws regulating unprotected subject matter; preemption turns on congressional intent and actual conflict.
- The Copyright Clause’s “limited Times” limitation restricts congressional grants of exclusive rights and does not itself invalidate state laws that operate outside the federal copyright scheme.
- Federal protection for sound recordings created by the 1971 amendments was prospective, leaving states free to regulate piracy of pre-February 15, 1972 recordings until Congress provides otherwise.

## Conclusion

The Court sustained California’s criminal prohibition on unauthorized duplication and sale of sound recordings made before federal protection attached, ruling that neither the Copyright Clause nor federal copyright statutes preempted the state’s anti-piracy measure.


Goldstein v. California, 412 U.S. 546 (1973)