The copyright infringement case against “used” digital music reseller ReDigi won’t...

“firm, publicly known deadline” for receipt of friend-of-the-court briefs. Google earlier tried to submit its own brief in the case to no avail with Sullivan, saying EMI’s claims against ReDigi’s upload of users’ tracks and resale of those tracks could harm the legal protections for the cloud-computing industry (WID Feb 3 p10). ReDigi “has not demonstrated any facts to overcome” Sullivan’s earlier finding that “the parties are fully capable of raising issues” that third parties would raise, and ReDigi and EMI “have every incentive to do so,” the judge said (http://xrl.us/bmshkg). The case management plan approved by Sullivan (http://xrl.us/bmshk9) sets a deadline of May 21 for all fact discovery and depositions to be completed. EMI and ReDigi agreed that “all or most issues regarding liability can be potentially resolved by summary judgment” following fact discovery, with motions for summary judgment, oppositions and replies due in June and July, and oral argument scheduled for Aug. 17. Sullivan also denied ReDigi’s request for a pre-motion conference regarding a preliminary injunction against EMI for allegedly pressuring Rdio to drop its licensing agreement with ReDigi for 30-second preview clips. EMI alleged in its suit that ReDigi didn’t have a proper licensing agreement for its preview clips. ReDigi said the dropped Rdio agreement constitutes improper “extrajudicial tactics” by EMI. Sullivan, who had given a lifeline to ReDigi by denying an injunction against the service (WID Feb 8 p6), showed annoyance with ReDigi’s request, “which is barely four sentences long” (http://xrl.us/bmshna). ReDigi “offers no legal theory or authority whatsoever as a basis for this Court to enjoin a third party from terminating its contractual relationship with Defendant,” the judge said in an order.