Case: 13-5946

Document: 006111897427

Filed: 12/02/2013

Page: 1

No. 13-5946

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ________________ SARAH JONES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DIRTY WORLD ENTERTAINMENT RECORDINGS, LLC, ET AL., Defendants-Appellants. _______________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky No. 2:09-CV-219-WOB Before the Honorable William O. Bertelsman _______________ MOTION IN OPPOSITION OF LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF FOR AMICI CURIAE AOL INC., EBAY INC., FACEBOOK, INC., GOOGLE INC., LINKEDIN CORP., MICROSOFT CORP., TUMBLR, INC., TWITTER, INC., AND ZYNGA INC., OPINION CORP., ADVANCE PUBLICATIONS, INC., AMAZON, INC., AVVO, INC., BUZZFEED, INC., CABLE NEWS NETWORK, INC., CURBED.COM LLC, GAWKER MEDIA, LLC, MAGAZINE PUBLISHERS OF AMERICA, INC, THE MCCLARCHY COMPANY, THE REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS, TRIP ADVISOR, LLC, YAHOO!, INC., AND YELP, INC. _______________ ERIC C. DETERS ERIC C. DETERS & PARTNERS, P.S.C. 5247 Madison Pike Independence, KY 41051 859.363.1900

Case: 13-5946

Document: 006111897427

Filed: 12/02/2013

Page: 2

Comes the Appellee, Sarah Jones, by and through counsel and requests that the Court deny the Amicus Curiae briefs of the above named interests. Rule of Appellate Procedure 29(b) requires that the movant show what their interest is in the outcome and why an amicus brief is desirable and relevant to the disposition of the case. Each movant claims to meet the requirements for filing an amicus curaie brief, but fails to show how those briefs would be relevant to the disposition of the case. Here, the single issue that is being appealed is whether or not the district court correctly denied the Defendant/Appellants’ motion for summary judgment based upon the Communications Decency Act. (Page 11 of Appellants’ brief). In deciding that the Defendants/Appellants were not immune under the communications decency act, the district court found that the Appellants adopted the posts by adding their own comments to the posts of others. The movants have failed to demonstrate what their interest is in the outcome of this question: Whether a website operator is afforded immunity under the Communications decency act, when that operator acted to adopt the comment. The ruling of the district court has no legal effect on interactive computer services, where the interactive computer services does not go so far as to editorialize

Case: 13-5946

Document: 006111897427

Filed: 12/02/2013

Page: 3

comments made by third parties. Therefore, the Appellee respectfully requests that the Court deny the movants’ respective motions to file amicus curiae briefs. Eric C. Deters ERIC C. DETERS ERIC C. DETERS & PARTNERS, P.S.C. 5247 Madison Pike Independence, KY 41051 859.363.1900

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and accurate copy of the foregoing was served upon counsel for all parties via the Court’s CM/ECF system this 2nd day of December, 2013. Eric C. Deters ERIC C. DETERS

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful