Thursday, January 19, 2006

Briefing Schedule Set in Atlantic v. Does 1-25

The Court signed a stipulation extending the RIAA's time to serve opposition papers to January 25th in Atlantic v. Does 1-25. Now,

-RIAA opposition papers due January 25th;

-John Doe #8's reply papers due February 6th.

The January 6th conference at which the motion was first discussed was public and tape recorded by the Court, and a transcript can be purchased from the Court.

The 'ex parte discovery order' continues to be stayed:

"Memo endorsed" order of Judge Laura Taylor Swain

Keywords: copyright download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs


Marsvenge said...

Well, at least this was not denied out of hand as the first two motions were. Good luck Ray, Hope you prevail in the conference tomorrow. The Hon. judge Swain denied the motion to sever because of insufficient evidence or allegations? but denied the motion to dismiss because there was enough information (and she based it on a trademark allegation????? as precedent, wasn't this an allegation of copyright infringement?). Amazing that she thinks the RIAA's lawyers hit the perfect middle ground, alleging just enough to satisfy federal pleading standards but not enough to dismiss. Is she computer literate? Does she understand Zi Mei's affidavit? Will that be taken into consideration taking in the fact that she is reviewing an ex parte order? As I said earlier, good luck tomorrow.

BTW - any word on the Michigan case for the appointment of a guardian ad litem?

Martin Osterman said...

I think that the temporary stay is a good first step since the judge didn't dismiss out of hand. Of course, references to potential invasion of privacy issues are bound to do that, since the courts have to take into account such things. I look forward to hearing the results of the conference!

jaded said...

Did the RIAA serve opposition papers yesterday?

raybeckerman said...

Dear Jaded,

Didn't see your comment until now, sorry. I know from your comment elsewhere that you've seen Whitehead's second declaration, since you've already eviscerated it. For the record, their papers were served a day late. They were having "technical" problems. I can see why.