Grande Presses Its Case for New Copyright Infringement Trial
The record labels' opposition to Grande Communications Networks’ renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL), and alternatively its request for a new trial (see 2303010018), “is full of red herrings and diversionary tactics” to try to persuade…
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.
the court “that the issues identified in Grande’s motion are not appropriate for JMOL,” said Grande’s reply brief Monday (docket 1:17-cv-00365) in U.S. District Court for Western Texas in Austin. A jury awarded $46.77 million in statutory damages Nov. 3 to several record labels for Grande’s willful contributory infringement of 1,403 copyrighted works. The labels alleged internet service provider Grande turned a blind eye to the wrongdoing of its subscribers. Grande argues there wasn’t a “sufficient evidentiary basis” for the jury to find for the plaintiffs on any of the allegations, and that’s “the proper purpose” of a motion for JMOL, it said. In alternatively seeking a new trial, Grande said “prejudicial errors in the admission and exclusion of evidence resulted in an unfair trial, a verdict against the weight of the evidence, and excessive damages.” As a result of those prejudicial errors, including errors about the Digital Millennial Copyright Act and other legislation, the plaintiffs “accomplished exactly what they set out to do: make the jury believe that Grande had an affirmative obligation to have a viable DMCA policy and failure to do so meant Grande was liable,” it said. That strategy “is expressly forbidden by statute,” it said.