Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
6Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
ver-brief

ver-brief

Ratings: (0)|Views: 356 |Likes:
Published by torrentfreak

More info:

Published by: torrentfreak on Dec 11, 2012
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

12/13/2012

pdf

text

original

 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASSAN ANGELO DIVISIONMALIBU MEDIA, LLC, PATRICKCOLLINS, INC. AND THIRDDEGREE FILMS,PlaintiffsVS.VERIZON ONLINE, LLC,Defendant§§§§§§§§§§§Civil Action No. 6:12-MC-17
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TOCONDUCT DISCOVERY AND FOR LEAVE TOSUPPLEMENT RESPONSE TO MOTION TO ENFORCE
TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:Verizon Online, LLC, submits the following arguments and authorities in support of itsMotion for Leave to Conduct Discovery and for Leave to Supplement Response to Motion toEnforce:BackgroundVerizon would refer the Court to the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Enforce and Verizon’sresponse to such motion for an understanding of the background of the issues involved.Purpose and Need for DiscoveryVerizon is aware that its request to be allowed to conduct discovery from Plaintiff underthese circumstances is unconventional, however, the circumstances of this case areuncoventional as well. As discussed in Verizon’s response to the Motion to Enforce, thePlaintiffs’ appears to seek discovery in an effort to pursue a scheme which, if not illegal, is at a
Brief in Support of Motion for Leave to Conduct DiscoveryPage 1
Case 6:12-mc-00017-C Document 5 Filed 12/10/12 Page 1 of 4 PageID 1882
 
minimum of a type to which the courts should not lend their powers and support. Thecircumstances are also unusual because the persons are subject to potential abuse by thePlaintiffs’ approach are unlikely to be able, for financial reasons, personal reasons, or Plaintiffs’tactical approach to those who do actively oppose them, to effectively oppose the Plaintiffs’oppressive and unfair methods.For these reasons it is important that the Court allow Verizon to conduct discovery anddevelop a complete factual record which will allow the Court to make an informed decision onthe propriety of permitting the discovery sought by Plaintiffs..Verizon intends, among other things, to seek discovery from the senior level managers of the Plaintiffs and from the persons affiliated with the Plaintiffs whose declarations have beenused to support the Plaintiffs’ requests for discovery. Verizon further intends to seek discoveryinto the business model of Plaintiffs and whether the Plaintiffs are good faith publishers of thematerial they purportedly seek to protect as opposed to whether Plaintiffs’ business model isprimarily profit from their aggressive and abusive copyright enforcement efforts.Allowing Verizon to develop these issues through discovery is warranted, in addition tothe reasons stated above, by the fact that these are important issues with great significance intoday’s internet society. Plaintiffs’ tactics appear to be much like those of schoolyard bullieswho push and shove until firm opposition is met when they shrink away. Plaintiffs, and thoselike them, have apparently avoided having to deal with these issues by not pursuing those whowould raise these issues.
Brief in Support of Motion for Leave to Conduct DiscoveryPage 2
Case 6:12-mc-00017-C Document 5 Filed 12/10/12 Page 2 of 4 PageID 1883
 
Authority of Court to Permit DiscoveryCourts possess inherent equitable power “over their own process, to prevent abuses,oppression, and injustices” involving discovery.
Seattle Times Co. v. Rinehart 
, 467 U.S. 20, 35(1984). This case presents an appropriate occasion to exercise such powers in the interest of resolving issues and avoiding abuse which otherwise may not be effectively preventedotherwise.RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
B
OERNER
,
 
D
ENNIS
&
 
F
RANKLIN
,
 
PLLC
P. O. Box 1738Lubbock, Texas 79408(806) 763-0044(806) 763-2084 (fax)
s/ Don C. Dennis
Don C. DennisSBN 05749400Email:dcdennis@bdflawfirm.com
M
ORRISON
&
 
F
OERSTER
,
 
LLP
555 West Fifth StreetLos Angeles, California 90013(213) 892-5200(213) 892-5454 (fax)Benjamin J. FoxGiancarlo UreyCOUNSEL FOR VERIZON ONLINE, LLC
Brief in Support of Motion for Leave to Conduct DiscoveryPage 3
Case 6:12-mc-00017-C Document 5 Filed 12/10/12 Page 3 of 4 PageID 1884

Activity (6)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Lambourghini liked this
Jordan Rushie liked this
Raphael Solomon liked this
Ben Sheffner 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)//-->