Lawyers in 2 Audio Home Recording Act Lawsuits Ordered to Show Cause Why Cases Shouldn't Be Combined
Lawyers for all sides involved in two Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA) lawsuits against the major carmakers have until Thursday to show cause in writing why the two cases shouldn’t be consolidated into one, said an order by U.S. District…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, in Washington, D.C. Ford and General Motors and their respective suppliers Clarion and Denso violated the AHRA because they shipped vehicles with CD-copying hard drives without building the Serial Copy Management System into the devices or paying the Copyright Office the required 2 percent hardware royalty on the wholesale price of the hardware, alleged the Alliance of Artists and Recording Companies in a July 25 lawsuit (see 1408010063). The alliance filed a second lawsuit mid-November on the same grounds against Chrysler and its supplier Mitsubishi. The defendants in both cases have sought to have the complaints thrown out. Lawyers for Chrysler and Mitsubishi urged the judges in the two cases in a Dec. 12 letter to consolidate the cases because they “involve common issues of fact and common questions of law.” Combining the cases will “enhance efficiency” and “avoid the possibility of inconsistent decisions in applying a rarely used statute to products that did not exist and were not specifically contemplated by Congress at the time of enactment more than 22 years ago,” the letter said of the AHRA.