Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2011
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	NOTE 9. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES As more fully described in Notes 3 and 14 of the 2010 Form 10-K, the Company's commitments primarily consist of programming and talent commitments, operating lease arrangements, purchase obligations for goods and services and future funding commitments related to equity investees. These arrangements result from the Company's normal course of business and represent obligations that may be payable over several years. The Company is also subject to a redeemable put option, payable in a foreign currency, with respect to an international subsidiary. The put option expires in January 2016, and is classified as Redeemable noncontrolling interest in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Contingencies The Company has certain indemnification obligations with respect to leases associated with the previously discontinued operations of Famous Players and Blockbuster Inc. (“Blockbuster”). In addition, Viacom has certain indemnities provided by the acquirer of Famous Players and by Blockbuster. At June 30, 2011, these lease commitments, substantially all of which relate to Famous Players, amounted to approximately $650 million. The amount of lease commitments varies over time depending on expiration or termination of individual underlying leases, or of the related indemnification obligation, and foreign exchange rates, among other things. The Company may also have exposure for certain other expenses related to the leases, such as property taxes and common area maintenance. The Company has recorded a liability of approximately $200 million with respect to such obligations. Based on the Company's consideration of financial information available to it, the lessees' historical performance in meeting their lease obligations and the underlying economic factors impacting the lessees' business models, the Company believes its accrual is sufficient to meet any future obligations. Legal Matters Litigation is inherently uncertain and always difficult to predict. However, based on the Company's understanding and evaluation of the relevant facts and circumstances, the Company believes that the legal matters described below and other litigation to which the Company is a party are not likely, in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial position or cash flows. In March 2007, the Company filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Google Inc. (“Google”) and its wholly-owned subsidiary YouTube, alleging that Google and YouTube violated and continue to violate the Company's copyrights. The Company is seeking both damages and injunctive relief. In March 2010, the Company and Google filed motions for summary judgment, and in June 2010, Google's motion was granted. The District Court decision has been appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the appeal has been fully briefed. The Company believes it has a meritorious appeal. In September 2007, Brantley, et al. v. NBC Universal, Inc., et al., was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California against the Company and several other program content providers on behalf of a purported nationwide class of cable and satellite subscribers. The plaintiffs also sued several major cable and satellite program distributors. Plaintiffs allege that separate contracts between the program providers and the cable and satellite operator defendants providing for the sale of programming in specific tiers each unreasonably restrain trade in a variety of markets in violation of the Sherman Act. In June 2011, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Court's decision dismissing, with prejudice, the plaintiff's third amended complaint. The plaintiffs have filed a petition for a rehearing of the case by the full Court of Appeals. The Company believes the plaintiffs' position in this litigation is without merit and intends to continue to vigorously defend this lawsuit. The Company's 2006 acquisition agreement with Harmonix Music Systems, Inc. (“Harmonix”), a developer of music-based games, including the Rock Band franchise, provided that to the extent financial results exceeded specific contractual targets against a defined gross profit metric for the calendar years 2007 and 2008, former Harmonix shareholders would be eligible for incremental earn-out payments. In 2008, the Company paid $150 million, subject to adjustment, under this earn-out agreement related to 2007 performance. The Company believes that it is entitled to a refund of a substantial portion of amounts previously paid, but the final amount of the earn-out has not yet been determined and is subject to a private dispute resolution process. In December 2010, a representative of the selling shareholders filed a lawsuit in the Court of Chancery for the State of Delaware alleging that the Company breached its obligations under the acquisition agreement in a manner that could impact the earn-out calculation and made certain other claims. In January 2011, the Company filed a motion to dismiss or stay the lawsuit. In March 2011, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, and in May 2011, the Company filed a renewed motion to dismiss. The Company believes the plaintiffs' position in these proceedings is without merit and intends to vigorously defend this lawsuit.

Commitments and Contingencies

9 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2011

Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

NOTE 9. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

As more fully described in Notes 3 and 14 of the 2010 Form 10-K, the Company's commitments primarily consist of programming and talent commitments, operating lease arrangements, purchase obligations for goods and services and future funding commitments related to equity investees. These arrangements result from the Company's normal course of business and represent obligations that may be payable over several years.

The Company is also subject to a redeemable put option, payable in a foreign currency, with respect to an international subsidiary. The put option expires in January 2016, and is classified as Redeemable noncontrolling interest in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Contingencies

The Company has certain indemnification obligations with respect to leases associated with the previously discontinued operations of Famous Players and Blockbuster Inc. (“Blockbuster”). In addition, Viacom has certain indemnities provided by the acquirer of Famous Players and by Blockbuster. At June 30, 2011, these lease commitments, substantially all of which relate to Famous Players, amounted to approximately $650 million. The amount of lease commitments varies over time depending on expiration or termination of individual underlying leases, or of the related indemnification obligation, and foreign exchange rates, among other things. The Company may also have exposure for certain other expenses related to the leases, such as property taxes and common area maintenance. The Company has recorded a liability of approximately $200 million with respect to such obligations. Based on the Company's consideration of financial information available to it, the lessees' historical performance in meeting their lease obligations and the underlying economic factors impacting the lessees' business models, the Company believes its accrual is sufficient to meet any future obligations.

Legal Matters

Litigation is inherently uncertain and always difficult to predict. However, based on the Company's understanding and evaluation of the relevant facts and circumstances, the Company believes that the legal matters described below and other litigation to which the Company is a party are not likely, in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

In March 2007, the Company filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Google Inc. (“Google”) and its wholly-owned subsidiary YouTube, alleging that Google and YouTube violated and continue to violate the Company's copyrights. The Company is seeking both damages and injunctive relief. In March 2010, the Company and Google filed motions for summary judgment, and in June 2010, Google's motion was granted. The District Court decision has been appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the appeal has been fully briefed. The Company believes it has a meritorious appeal.

In September 2007, Brantley, et al. v. NBC Universal, Inc., et al., was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California against the Company and several other program content providers on behalf of a purported nationwide class of cable and satellite subscribers. The plaintiffs also sued several major cable and satellite program distributors. Plaintiffs allege that separate contracts between the program providers and the cable and satellite operator defendants providing for the sale of programming in specific tiers each unreasonably restrain trade in a variety of markets in violation of the Sherman Act. In June 2011, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Court's decision dismissing, with prejudice, the plaintiff's third amended complaint. The plaintiffs have filed a petition for a rehearing of the case by the full Court of Appeals. The Company believes the plaintiffs' position in this litigation is without merit and intends to continue to vigorously defend this lawsuit.

The Company's 2006 acquisition agreement with Harmonix Music Systems, Inc. (“Harmonix”), a developer of music-based games, including the Rock Band franchise, provided that to the extent financial results exceeded specific contractual targets against a defined gross profit metric for the calendar years 2007 and 2008, former Harmonix shareholders would be eligible for incremental earn-out payments. In 2008, the Company paid $150 million, subject to adjustment, under this earn-out agreement related to 2007 performance. The Company believes that it is entitled to a refund of a substantial portion of amounts previously paid, but the final amount of the earn-out has not yet been determined and is subject to a private dispute resolution process. In December 2010, a representative of the selling shareholders filed a lawsuit in the Court of Chancery for the State of Delaware alleging that the Company breached its obligations under the acquisition agreement in a manner that could impact the earn-out calculation and made certain other claims. In January 2011, the Company filed a motion to dismiss or stay the lawsuit. In March 2011, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, and in May 2011, the Company filed a renewed motion to dismiss. The Company believes the plaintiffs' position in these proceedings is without merit and intends to vigorously defend this lawsuit.