SPOTIFY’S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CLASS ALLEGATIONS;CASE NO. 2:15-CV-09929-BRO-RAO
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
MAYER BROWN LLP
JOHN NADOLENCO (SBN 181128)
 jnadolenco@mayerbrown.com
EUGENE VOLOKH (SBN 194464)
evolokh@mayerbrown.com
350 South Grand Avenue, 25th Floor Los Angeles, California 90071-1503Telephone: (213) 229-9500Facsimile: (213) 625-0248A. JOHN P. MANCINI (admitted 
 pro hac vice
)
 jmancini@mayerbrown.com
ALLISON LEVINE STILLMAN*
astillman@mayerbrown.com
1221 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10020-1001Telephone: (212) 506-2295Facsimile: (212) 849-5895ARCHIS A. PARASHARAMI*
aparasharami@mayerbrown.com
DANIEL E. JONES*
djones@mayerbrown.com
1999 K Street, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20006-1101Telephone: (202) 263-3328Facsimile: (202) 263-5328
*Pro hac vice application to be filed 
Attorneys for Defendant SPOTIFY USA INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTCENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID LOWERY, n v ua yand on behalf of himself and allothers similarly situated,Plaintiffs,vs.SPOTIFY USA INC., a Delawarecorporation,Defendant.Case No. 2:15-cv-09929-BRO-RAO
DEFENDANT SPOTIFY USA INC.’SMEMORANDUM OF POINTS ANDAUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OFMOTION TO STRIKE CLASSALLEGATIONS
Date: April 4, 2016Time: 1:30 pmJudge: Hon. Beverly Reid O’Connell
Case 2:15-cv-09929-BRO-RAO Document 26-1 Filed 02/12/16 Page 1 of 35 Page ID #:189
 
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
SPOTIFY’S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CLASS ALLEGATIONS;CASE NO. 2:15-CV-09929-BRO-RAO
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................1BACKGROUND......................................................................................................3LEGAL STANDARD ..............................................................................................4ARGUMENT............................................................................................................5I. The Proposed Class Is An Impermissible Fail-Safe Class.............................5II. The Proposed Class Is Not Ascertainable......................................................7III. The Putative Class Does Not Satisfy Rule 23(a)(2).....................................12A. Plaintiff’s Allegations Are Incapable Of Class-WideResolution..........................................................................................131. Whether A Work Has A Valid Copyright Registration ..........132. Whether Spotify Has a License or Authorization ToDistribute Any Particular Composition...................................153. Whether Spotify “Made Accurate Royalty Payments”...........184. The Basis and Method for Determining and ComputingDamages ..................................................................................185. Willful Infringement................................................................19B. In Light Of These Individualized Inquiries, Rule 23 And DueProcess Prohibit Certification Of Plaintiff’s Proposed Class............20IV. Plaintiff Cannot Establish Predominance And Superiority Under Rule23(b)(3).........................................................................................................23V. Plaintiff Cannot Certify A Rule 23(b)(2) Injunctive Class Either...............25CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................27
Case 2:15-cv-09929-BRO-RAO Document 26-1 Filed 02/12/16 Page 2 of 35 Page ID #:190
 
TABLE OF AUTHORITIESPage
ii
SPOTIFY’S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CLASS ALLEGATIONS;CASE NO. 2:15-CV-09929-BRO-RAO
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
Cases
 In re 2TheMart.com, Inc. Secs. Litig.
,114 F. Supp. 2d 955 (C.D. Cal. 2000)..................................................................3
 Am. W. Door & Trim v. Arch Specialty Ins. Co.
,2015 WL 1266787 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2015)...........................................3, 4, 24
 Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor 
,521 U.S. 591 (1997)...........................................................................................23
 Angel Music Inc. v. ABC Sports, Inc.
,112 F.R.D. 70 (S.D.N.Y. 1986)..........................................................................21
 Ashcroft v. Iqbal
,556 U.S. 662 (2009).............................................................................................3
 Authors Guild v. Google, Inc.
,721 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 2013)...............................................................................21
 Bateman v. Am. Multi-Cinema, Inc.
,623 F.3d 708 (9th Cir. 2010)..............................................................................25
 BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore
,517 U.S. 559 (1996)...........................................................................................24
 Brazil v. Dell Inc.
,585 F. Supp. 2d 1158 (N.D. Cal. 2008) ...........................................................7, 8
Cartoon Network LP v. CSC Holdings, Inc.
,536 F.3d 121 (2d Cir. 2008)...............................................................................17
Comcast Corp. v. Behrend 
,133 S. Ct. 1426 (2013) .......................................................................................23
 Deitz v. Comcast Corp.
,2007 WL 2015440 (N.D. Cal. July 11, 2007)......................................................7
eBay, Inc. v. MercExchanges, LLC 
,547 U.S. 388 (2006)...........................................................................................26
Case 2:15-cv-09929-BRO-RAO Document 26-1 Filed 02/12/16 Page 3 of 35 Page ID #:191
View on Scribd