Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Defendant moves to compel plaintiffs to respond to outstanding interrogatories in SONY BMG v. Tenenbaum

In SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum, defendant has moved to compel the plaintiffs to respond to defendant's outstanding interrogatories.

Defendant's motion to compel plaintiffs' responses to interrogatories

Keywords: lawyer digital copyright law online internet law legal download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie independent label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs intellectual property portable music player


Alter_Fritz said...

Oh, it seems the parties are at least now doing some "normal litigation" business. (That's at least how it looks to me given the recent interrogatories and requests for admissions)

But I still feel Eve is "full of it" as newly evidenced with the interrogatories she wants defendant answer, jet big and fat adressing them to Nesson and demanding Joel Tenenbaum to answer stuff with respect to fair use that he might want to claim with respect to the Student/professor megaupload songs incident! an incident that has nothing to do with Joel's alledged/admitted Kazza usage that is what the RIAA is suing him over.

written discovery regarding fair use(PDF direct link!)

Alter_Fritz said...

P.S. Defendant's Counsel writes: "Plaintiff's response is attached as Exhibit A."
It would be nice to read Plaintiffs responses so far Ray. Unfortunately you have not attached it too. :-(

Jadeic said...

Dictionary: hy·per·bo·le (hī-pûr'bə-lē) n.

A small flightless bird able to puff itself up far beyond its size and importance and, with the added benefit of the chameleon-like ability to change the colouring of its plumage, able to to pretend to be that which it is not depending upon circumstances. Furthermore, if that did not give it enough of an advantage when it meets an adversary, it also has the ability to mimic any songbird and changes its tune at will. Yet, when all else fails it relies upon an uncanny ability to leg it out of the danger zone at speed.

Also used figuratively in the phrase 'It's time the hyperbole came home to roost'.


Alter_Fritz said...

P.S. and specially given that Eve allegedly used "YOU" sometimes here as their special YOU!
That is I alledge the one which includes nearly "god and the world" if you so will when we remember how Sid Leach showed the RIAA how they are using the "YOU" definition.

What have written papers from 3rd parties to do with what Joel might have written?
Request for production No 2 that is compared to No 3 where the you is in lower case again where it therefor should only mean Joel and no unrelated 3rd parties!

Same with interrogatory 1 and the capital YOU. As if Joel knows what some 3rd parties and/or other students from different universities or professors fileshared and where their computers are!

Unbelievable this RIAA-Eve!

(and that she does not define "YOU" for this discovery act here, is that the "nice english manner"?)

Anonymous said...

Plaintiffs had responded by snail mail

This man finds the use of such techie terms, while amusing -- unprofessional.

One might more properly say that Plaintiffs had responded by United States Postal Service mail.

Perception and appearances matter greatly and modern slang usages do not help that.

{The Common Man Speaking}

Anonymous said...

This man expects that all questions regarding the sales volumes and income from the sales of the allegedly infringed recordings will be denied due the the Plaintiffs maintaining that they do not need to prove Actual Damages since they are seeking Statutory relief.

Asking for the chain of copyright ownership, however, seems valid.

{The Common Man Speaking}

Unknown said...

Well, The good Professor keeps showing himself in dire need of some proof reading.

I fear for Tenenbaum.

Anonymous said...


The degree of reprehensibility of Defendant's conduct can only be judged in the light of damage it caused Plaintiffs. And the size of the award against him, should he lose, is based on the degree of reprehensibility. So the information is pertinent, I believe.