Simultaneously, the court granted an injunction to enjoin 321 Studios from manufacturing, distributing, or otherwise trafficking in any type of DVD circumvention software.

This software allowed users to copy portions of DVDs onto CDs regardless of whether they were encoded using Content Scramble System ("CSS").

The court's analysis in the decision did not reach the Copyright violation issue, but directly rejected 321 Studios's claims and granted the injunction based on the DMCA provisions.

Section 1201(a)(2) of the DMCA prohibits the "manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, or part thereof, that" is primarily designed or produced for purposes of circumventing a technological protection measure that controls access to a copyrighted work.

The court said that, while there are legitimate uses that some users might engage in, 321 Studios itself was distributing software which had the primary purpose of circumventing CSS.

[1] The court rejected 321 Studios' argument that the DMCA, as enforced in this case, would result in an impermissible restriction of free speech.

[1] Applying the intermediate scrutiny standard, the court found that Congress enacted the DMCA while carefully balancing the interests of copyright holders and the public.

[1] The court rejected 321 Studios' argument that the DMCA unconstitutionally burdens the fair use rights of users of copyrighted materials.

321 Studios argued that this places an unreasonable financial burden on fair use, an argument that the court said must be tied to the content of the speech, not simply the function.

The court responded to this by asserting that a user could copy the access from a non-CSS encrypted DVD or from another non-digital source.

[5] 321 Studios asserted that the line of reasoning in previous DMCA cases was overturned by the conclusion in Eldred v. Ashcroft that fair use is constitutionally based.