Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
7Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Viacom Summary Judgment Motion

Viacom Summary Judgment Motion

Ratings: (0)|Views: 585 |Likes:
Published by bizdayweb

More info:

Published by: bizdayweb on Mar 18, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/09/2010

pdf

text

original

 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
VIACOM INTERNATIONAL INC.,COMEDY PARTNERS,COUNTRY MUSIC TELEVISION, INC.,PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION,and BLACK ENTERTAINMENT TELEVISIONLLC,Plaintiffs,v.YOUTUBE INC., YOUTUBE, LLC, andGOOGLE, INC.,Defendants.
1
1
)
1
)
1
)
1
)
Case No. 1 07-cv-02 103 (LLS)
)
(Related Case No. 1 07-cv-03582 (LLS)
1
)
1
1
1
1
MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF VIACOM'S MOTION FORPARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON LIABILITY AND INAPPLICABILITY OFTHE DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT SAFE HARBOR DEFENSE
Stuart J. Baskin (No. SB-9936)John Gueli (No. JG-8427)Kirsten Nelson Cunha (No. KN-0283)SHEARMAN
&
STERLING LLP599 Lexington AvenueNew York, NY 10022Telephone: (2 12) 848-4000Facsimile: (2 12) 848-7 179Paul M. Smith (No. PS-2362)William M. Hohengarten (No. WH-5233)Scott
B.
Wilkens (pro hac vice)Matthew S. Hellman (pro
hac
vice)JENNER
&
BLOCK LLP1099 New York Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20001Telephone: (202) 639-6000Facsimile: (202) 639-6066Susan J. Kohlmann (No. SK-1855)JENNER
&
BLOCK LLP9 19 Third AvenueNew York, NY 10022Telephone: (2 12) 89 1 1690Facsimile: (2 12) 89 1 1699Attorneys for Plaintiffs
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
...
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
......................................................................................................
11
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
.................................................................................................
SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD
....................................................................................
4
ARGUMENT
.................................................................................................................................
5
I
.
DEFENDANTS ARE LIABLE UNDER
GROKSTER
BECAUSE THEYINTENTIONALLY OPERATED YOUTUBE AS A HAVEN FOR MASSIVEINFRINGEMENT
...................................................................................................................
5
A
.
Statement of Undisputed Facts Relevant to Point I
.......................................................
5
1
.
The Founders' Knowledge and Intent Concerning Infringement
..........................
5
..................................
.
Google's Knowledge and Intent Concerning Infringement
123
.
Defendants Cannot Walk Away from Their Contemporaneous Internal
..................................................................................................................
ocuments
21
B
.
Defendants' Intentional Operation of YouTube as an Infringement HavenMakes Them Liable Under
Grokster
...........................................................................
24
I1
.
DEFENDANTS ARE VICARIOUSLY LIABLE BECAUSE THEY DERIVED ADIRECT FINANCIAL BENEFIT FROM INFRINGEMENT THAT THEY HAD THERIGHT AND ABILITY TO CONTROL
............................................................................
30
A
.
Statement of Undisputed Facts Relevant to Point I1
....................................................
30
1
Defendants' Direct Financial Benefit from Infringement
.....................................
302
.
Defendants' Right and Ability to Control Infringement
.......................................
32
B
.
Defendants' Financial Interest and Control Makes Them Vicariously Liable
.........
38
1
Direct Financial Benefit
............................................................................................
382
.
Right and Ability To Control
..................................................................................
40
1II.DEFENDANTS ARE ALSO LIABLE AS DIRECT INFRINGERS
...............................
42
A
.
Statement of Facts Relevant to Point I11
.......................................................................
42
B
.
Defendants' Own Conduct Constitutes Direct Infringement
.....................................
5
 
IV
.
DEFENDANTS DO NOT QUALIFY FOR THE DMCA DEFENSE
..............................
47A
.
Defendants' Knowledge and Intent Defeat the DMCA Defense
.................................
50
B
.
Defendants' Direct Financial Benefit and Right and Ability to ControlInfringement Defeat the DMCA Defense
......................................................................
56
C
.
The Infringement on YouTube Does Not Result from the Specified CoreInternet Functions to Which The DMCA Applies
.......................................................
61
CONCLUSION
............................................................................................................................
67

Activity (7)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
jldavidson6583 liked this
mightybrew69 liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->