The U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday to consider a legal challenge by television networks and Hollywood studios to Cablevision Systems Corp.'s (CVC) next-generation digital video recorder, clearing the way for the cable company to offer the new service this year.

The networks and studios argued that Cablevision's new remote-storage DVR violated federal copyright laws.

Cablevision's service would allow customers to record and store television shows on central computer servers maintained by Cablevision instead of having to record them on expensive DVR cable boxes installed in their homes.

Cablevision says the system would allow it to provide DVR services at lower costs, which could lead to a rise in new subscribers to a technology that allows viewers to watch programs whenever they choose and to skip commercials while they do so.

Among those that sued to block Cablevision's service were General Electric Co.'s (GE) NBC; CBS Corp. (CBS); Walt Disney Co.'s (DIS) ABC; and News Corp.'s (NWSA) Twentieth Century Fox.

News Corp. owns Dow Jones, publisher of this newswire and The Wall Street Journal.

The media companies argued that Cablevision's new service would illegally copy their programs without a license. A New York federal trial judge agreed in 2007, giving the challengers an initial legal victory. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, however, overturned that ruling last summer and sided with Cablevision.

The 2nd Circuit said the remote-DVR service was not that different from a VCR and that Cablevision was not directly liable for copies of programs that are made at a customer's request.

The Supreme Court, without comment, chose Monday to leave that ruling in place.

Leading music companies, publishing organizations and professional sports leagues all filed friend-of-the-court briefs supporting the television networks.

The case is Cable News Network Inc. v. CSC Holdings Inc., 08-448.

 
  In other Supreme Court news Monday:

- The high court rejected a challenge to a New Hampshire law that bars the sale of doctors' prescription data to drug companies, which use the information to target their sales pitches to physicians.

State officials said the law protected the privacy of doctors and patients and helped control health-care costs on expensive brand-name drugs.

Data mining companies IMS Health Inc. (RX) and Verispan LLC argued that they had a First Amendment right to publish the information. A federal appeals court in Boston upheld the state's law last year. The case is IMS Health v. Ayotte, 08-1202.

- By Brent Kendall, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-9222; brent.kendall@dowjones.com