Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Plaintiffs' Opposition to petition for certiorari in Maverick Recordings v. Whitney Harper

Plaintiffs' Opposition to petition for certiorari in Maverick Recordings v. Whitney Harper

Ratings: (0)|Views: 4,644|Likes:
Published by Ben Sheffner
Plaintiffs' Opposition to petition for certiorari in Maverick Recordings v. Whitney Harper
Plaintiffs' Opposition to petition for certiorari in Maverick Recordings v. Whitney Harper

More info:

Published by: Ben Sheffner on Oct 15, 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

07/10/2013

pdf

text

original

 
No. 10-94
================================================================
 In The
Supreme Court of the United States
---------------------------------
---------------------------------WHITNEY HARPER,
 Petitioner,
vs.MAVERICK RECORDING COMPANY; UMGRECORDINGS, INC.; ARISTA RECORDS LLC;WARNER BROS. RECORDS INC.; SONYBMG MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT,
 Respondents.
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
On Petition For Writ Of CertiorariTo The United States Court Of AppealsFor The Fifth Circuit
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TOPETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
---------------------------------
---------------------------------T
IMOTHY
M. R
EYNOLDS
 
(
Counsel of Record
)E
 VE
G. B
URTON
 
 A
NDREW
B. M
OHRAZ
 
H
OLME
R
OBERTS
&
 
O
WEN
LLP1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 4100Denver, Colorado 80203(303) 861-7000Fax: (303) 866-0200Timothy.Reynolds@hro.comM
 ATTHEW
J.O
PPENHEIM
T
HE
O
PPENHEIM
G
ROUP
, LLP7304 River Falls DrivePotomac, Maryland 20854(301) 299-4986Fax: (866) 766-1678
 Attorneys for Respondents
 ================================================================
COCKLE LAW BRIEF PRINTING CO. (800) 225-6964OR CALL COLLECT (402) 342-2831
 
i
QUESTION PRESENTED
 Whether a defendant infringer of copyrights insound recordings should be precluded from seeking areduction in statutory damages under an “innocentinfringement” defense where there is no dispute thatthe elements of 17 U.S.C. § 402(d) have been met, i.e.,there is no dispute that the plaintiffs placed propernotices of copyright on the published copies of thesound recordings and that the defendant had accessto such copies.
 
ii
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
 Pursuant to Sup. Ct. R. 29.6, Respondents stateas follows:Respondent Maverick Recording Company is a joint venture between SR/MDM Venture Inc. andMaverick Partner Inc. The ultimate parent corpora-tion of both SR/MDM Venture Inc. and MaverickPartner Inc. is Warner Music Group Corp., which ispublicly traded in the United States.Respondent UMG Recordings, Inc.’s ultimateparent corporation is Vivendi S.A., a publicly heldFrench company.Respondent Arista Records LLC is a Delawarelimited liability company owned by Arista Music(formerly BMG Music), a New York general partner-ship, which is not publicly traded.Respondent Warner Bros. Records Inc.’s ultimateparent corporation is Warner Music Group Corp.,which is publicly traded in the United States.Respondent Sony BMG Music Entertainment,n/k/a Sony Music Entertainment, is a Delaware gen-eral partnership owned by Sony Music Holdings, Inc.(98%) and USCO Sub LLC (2%), neither of which ispublicly traded. Its ultimate parent corporation isSony Corporation (Japan) which is publicly traded inthe United States.

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)//-->