• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
#1224757 v1
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
CAPITOL RECORDS, INC., a Delawarecorporation; UMG RECORDINGS, INC., aDelaware corporation; MAVERICKRECORDING COMPANY, a California jointventure; BMG MUSIC, a New York generalpartnership; ARISTA RECORDS LLC, aDelaware limited liability company; SONYBMG MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT, a Delawaregeneral partnership; and WARNER BROS.RECORDS INC., a Delaware corporation,Plaintiffs,v.DEBBIE FOSTER andAMANDA FOSTER,Defendants.))))))))))))))))))))Case No. CIV-04-1569-W
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THIS COURT’SFEBRUARY 6, 2007 ORDER AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT THEREOF
Case 5:04-cv-01569-W Document 166 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 1 of 19
 
i
#1224757 v1
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................iTABLE OF AUTHORITIES..........................................................................................................iiSUMMARY OF ARGUMENT......................................................................................................1ARGUMENT..................................................................................................................................4I. This Court’s Failure To Find Any Of The Fogerty Factors MilitatesAgainst An Award Of Fees.................................................................................................4II. The Court’s Assumption That There Was No Factual Basis ForPlaintiffs’ Secondary Infringement Claims Is Not Supported ByThe Record And Is Inconsistent With Prior Findings By The Court..................................5III. The Court’s Order Is Based On Erroneous Assumptions AsTo The Law Regarding Claims For Contributory Infringement.......................................11IV. The Court’s Finding That Defendant Had No Choice But ToCapitulate To Plaintiffs’ Settlement Demands Or To LitigateIs Contrary To The Record...............................................................................................12CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................................15
Case 5:04-cv-01569-W Document 166 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 2 of 19
 
ii
#1224757 v1
 
TABLE OF AUTHORITIESCases
 Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Rhyme Syndicate Music, 376 F.3d 615 (6
th
Cir. 2004).........................8Casella v. Morris, 820 F.2d 362 (11
th
Cir. 1987)............................................................................8Davidson v. Allis-Chalmers Corp., 567 F. Supp. 1532 (W.D. Mo. 1983).................................6, 7Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517 (1994)........................................................................1, 4, 5Gershwin Publishing Corp. v. Columbia Artists Management, Inc., 443 F.2d1159 (2d Cir. 1971).................................................................................................................7, 8In re Aimster Copyright Litigation, 334 F.3d 643 (7
th
Cir. 2003), cert. denied,540 U.S. 1107 (2004)..................................................................................................................8Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., 545 U.S. 913 (2005)............................7, 8
Statutes
 17 U.S.C. § 505...............................................................................................................................5
Case 5:04-cv-01569-W Document 166 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 3 of 19
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...