BMG Rights Management and its co-plaintiff record labels conferred with defendant Altice USA and agreed on the choice of former U.S. Magistrate Judge Suzanne Segal of Signature Resolution in Los Angeles to oversee mediation in their contributory infringement dispute, said their notice Thursday (docket 2:22-cv-00471) in U.S. District Court for Eastern Texas in Marshall. Segal was a magistrate judge for 18 years in the Central District of California before retiring in 2020, per her LinkedIn bio. The music companies allege Altice ignored the rampant copyright infringement of its high-speed internet subscribers, and Altice moved to dismiss their complaint, asserting it can't be expected to police the internet (see 2303140008).
Walmart.com “denies each and every allegation” from independent film company Redoak Communications that it’s unlawfully selling unlicensed DVD and Blu-ray copies online of the 1981 horror film Just Before Dawn (see 2301060023), said the retailer’s answer with a jury demand Monday (docket 9:23-cv-80008) in U.S. District Court for South Florida in West Palm Beach. Redoak also is suing Amazon, Best Buy and Target with the same allegations, and Amazon answered March 1 with a countersuit asserting Redoak’s claims are preempted by the first-sale doctrine (see 2303100001). Walmart.com likewise argued Redoak’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the first-sale doctrine because once Redoak’s licensees sold products in commerce, it had “no right to control subsequent disposition or sales of those products.” Redoak’s claims also are barred by its failure to provide “valid notices” under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, said Walmart.com. It urged dismissal of the complaint with prejudice and the denial of all relief sought by Redoak, plus recovery of court costs.
The plaintiff record labels in the case against internet service provider Grande Communications Network filed notice Monday (docket 1:17-cv-00365) of a conditional cross-appeal at the 5th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court of the final judgment entered Jan. 30 in their favor by U.S. District Judge David Ezra for Western Texas in Austin. A jury awarded the labels $46.77 million in statutory damages Nov. 3 for Grande’s willful contributory infringement of 1,403 copyrighted works, and Ezra’s judgment mirrored the jury’s verdict. But Grande filed a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, or alternatively a new trial, and also is appealing Ezra’s judgment and the verdict to the 5th Circuit (see 2303020031). The labels’ cross-appeal is conditional on Grande’s appeal resulting in any portion of the final judgment “being reversed or remanded” to the district court, said the notice. The labels acknowledge Grande filed a renewed motion for judgment and its notice of appeal will become effective once the district court resolves that motion, it said. “The same is true” for the labels’ notice of conditional cross-appeal, it said.
Joshua Streit should face 51 to 60 months in prison for his piracy of sports league streaming content via his Hehestreams.com site and a related attempt to extort Major League Baseball, said DOJ in a government sentencing memo filed last week with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. That range "would be sufficient but not greater than necessary to serve the legitimate purposes of sentencing," it said in docket 22-cr-00350. Streit's attorneys argued for leniency (see 2303030017).
Pro se plaintiff James Linlor opposes McAfee’s March 3 motion for a two-week extension to March 29 to answer Linlor’s complaint alleging McAfee “cybersquatted” on the cyberguard.com internet domain for 15 years with no “bona fide” ties to Linlor’s trademarked term Cyberguard (see 2301310011), said his opposition Wednesday (docket 5:23-cv-00385]) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Diego. Linlor’s complaint contends he’s actively trying to grow his cybersecurity business, and is blocked from use of his undisputed trademark by McAfee’s “squatting” on the identically named internet domain. “No good cause exists for a delay in McAfee's time to respond” because “substantial harm” to Linlor “is occurring daily via fraudulent transfers and attempts to complicate this case,” said Linlor’s opposition.
U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra for Southern Florida in West Palm Beach set a March 22 evidentiary hearing via Zoom on plaintiff Redoak Communications’ motions for default judgment against defendants Ronin Flix and Grindhouse Video, said his signed order Thursday (docket 9:23-cv-80008). The hearing also will address Redoak’s motions for alternative service on two other defendants it hasn’t been able to serve with summonses, said the order. Independent film company Redoak’s Jan. 4 complaint alleges 14 defendants, including Amazon, Best Buy, Target and Walmart are unlawfully selling DVD and Blu-ray copies online of the 1981 horror film Just Before Dawn without a Redoak license (see 2301060023). Amazon countersued Redoak March 1, alleging that under the Supreme Court’s 2013 first-sale doctrine decision in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons and other case law, “once a unit of a product embodying copyrighted expression is lawfully made, it can be resold in the U.S. without requiring any further authorization from the copyright holder.”
The U.S. Appeals Court for the Federal District denied Western Digital’s mandamus petitions to vacate the Western Texas district court’s decision denying transfer of Viasat’s patent infringement claims and to transfer the case to U.S. District Court for Northern California, said its order Monday (docket 23-115). Viasat opposed the petitions. In its order denying transfer, the district court said Western Digital is headquartered in Northern California, but several of its employees who are potential witnesses work from its offices in Austin, and eight former employees who are also potential witnesses still live within the Western District of Texas, it said. The district court rejected Western Digital’s argument that the current and former employees don’t have relevant and material information, it said. The Federal Circuit’s mandamus review was limited to determining whether the denial of transfer was such a clear abuse of discretion that refusing transfer produced a patently erroneous result, said the order. The district court considered the relevant factors and found Western Digital failed to show the Northern District of California “had a clear comparative advantage with regard to the witness and sources of proof factors,” it said: “Mindful of the standard of review on mandamus, we are not prepared to disturb those findings, which, taken together with the district court’s other findings, provide a plausible basis for its judgment of discretion to deny the transfer request here.”
McAfee consented to have plaintiff James Linlor’s trademark case proceed before a magistrate judge, said its signed consent form Thursday (docket 5:23-cv-00385) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Jose. Pro se plaintiff Linlor alleged in a Jan. 26 complaint that McAfee has been “cybersquatting” on his rightfully owned cyberguard.com internet domain name for 15 years, and McAfee’s misconduct blocked him from actively growing his cybersecurity business (see 2301310011). Linlor previously consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction in his case.
Recent criminal sentences by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for illegal distribution of copyrighted materials support varying from sentencing guidelines for Joshua Streit, said his counsel, Jeffrey Lichtman, in a sentencing submission last week (docket 1:22-cr-00350). Under sentencing guidelines, the St. Louis Park, Minnesota, defendant -- who was charged in 2021 with intrusions into MLB computer systems, and with illegally streaming copyrighted content from MLB, NBA, NFL and NHL -- faces 57 to 60 months imprisonment after pleading guilty in June to one charge in a plea deal, Lichtman wrote U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter, asking for leniency. He said the March 16 sentencing should take into account that Streit started his pirate streaming operation while caring for his mother who ultimately succumbed to brain cancer. With Streit being employed, "the prospects for his rehabilitation are therefore very good," he said.
Following its renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law Monday in U.S. District Court for Western Texas in Austin, or alternatively a new trial there (see 2303010018), internet service provider Grande Communications Network is now taking its case to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, said its notice of appeal Wednesday (docket 1:17-cv-00365). A jury in Austin awarded $46.77 million in statutory damages Nov. 3 to several record labels for Grande’s willful contributory infringement of 1,403 copyrighted works (see 2211040023). The labels alleged Grande turned a blind eye to the wrongdoing of its subscribers. Grande now asserts there was “insufficient evidence” at trial of direct infringement that warranted holding it liable for the significant money damages. Grande also asserts “prejudicial errors" detrimental to its cause resulted in an unfair trial.