Grande's Request to Extend Time to Post Bond 'Meritless,' Say Music Labels

Court for Western Texas in Austin. Plaintiffs UMG and other music labels want to ensure they can proceed with collecting the judgment amount if the court denies the motion by Grande to waive the supersedeas bond requirement, and if Grande fails to obtain a bond, said the reply. The music labels were awarded $46.8 million in the copyright infringement case involving Grande internet subscribers. Parties typically have 30 days from judgment entry to obtain and post a supersedeas bond, said plaintiffs' reply; as a “courtesy,” they proposed that Grande be given seven additional days from the denial of its waiver motion to post one. Grande’s reasoning for an extension was that it may have to submit more financial information to bond issuers, which “could take some time,” but it “has already had two months beyond the 30-day period” provided in Rule 62 to submit the information necessary to obtain a bond, plaintiffs said. Grande’s request for more time “is simply [its] latest effort to complicate the supersedeas bond process and delay its obligation to obtain a bond like any other defendant who loses at trial,” said the reply. The music labels requested (see 2304070033) an additional $13 million in March for attorneys’ fees of $5.2 million, plus $7.4 million in prejudgment interest and about $200,000 in expert costs on the jury’s verdict that Grande’s copyright infringement was “willful.”