DOCSLIB.ORG

Court File No.: T-2058-12 FEDERAL COURT BETWEEN

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Court File No.: T-2058-12 FEDERAL COURT BETWEEN Court File No.: T-2058-12 FEDERAL COURT BETWEEN: VOLTAGE PICTURES LLC PLAINTIFF/MOVING PARTY - and - JOHN DOE and JANE DOE DEFENDANTS - and - TEKSAVVY SOLUTIONS INC. RESPONDING PARTY - and – SAMUELSON-GLUSHKO CANADIAN INTERNET POLICY AND PUBLIC INTEREST CLINIC INTERVENER MOTION RECORD OF THE SAMUELSON-GLUSHKO CANADIAN INTERNET POLICYAND PUBLIC INTEREST CLINIC (Motion for a written examination of a non-party under rule 238) Volume 4 of 4: Book of Authorities, Part 2 Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC) University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law, Common Law Section 57 Louis Pasteur Street Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5 David Fewer Tel: (613) 562-5800 ext. 2558 Fax: (613) 562-5417 TO: THE ADMINISTRATOR Federal Court of Canada AND TO: VOLTAGE PICTURES LLC P. James Zibarras BRAUTI THORNING ZIBARRAS LLP 151 Yonge Street, Suite 1800 Toronto, ON M5C 2W7 Tel: (416) 362-4567 Fax: (416) 362-8410 AND TO: TEKSAVVY SOLUTIONS INC. Nicholas McHaffie Stikeman Elliot LLP Suite 1600, 50 O’Connor Street Ottawa, ON K1P 6L2 Tel: (613) 566-0546 Fax: (613) 230-8877 Table of Contents TAB TITLE PAGE VOLUME 1 1 Affidavits And Transcripts 2 A Affidavit of Alexander M Cooke, dated 27 February 2013 2 B Affidavit of Timothy Lethbridge, dated 27 February 2013 59 Transcript of the cross-examination of Barry Logan on his C 71 affidavit of 7 December 2012, dated 5 June 2013 Exhibit 1: First nine pages of printed material from Canipre D 158 Website. (Page 8 identified as cached copy) Exhibit 2: Bundle of Documents, consisting of Media E 167 Coverage of Canipre VOLUME 2 2 Memorandum of Fact and Law 168 3 Appendix A: Statutes and Regulations Copyright Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42 Federal Court Rules, SOR 98/106 Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000 VOLUME 3 4 Appendix B: Book of Authorities 1654776 Ontario Limited v. Stewart, 2013 ONCA 184, [2013] OJ A No 1362 (QL) A.B. v. Bragg Communications Inc., 2012 SCC 46, [2012] 2 SCR B 567 C BMG Canada Inc. v. Doe, 2005 FCA 193, [2005], 4 RCF 81 D Cash Converters Canada Inc. v. Oshawa (City), 2007 ONCA 502 Home Office v. Harman, [1983] 1 AC 280 (UK HL) [1982] 1 All E ER 532 Ingenuity 13 LLC v. John Doe, Case No. 2:12-cv-8333-ODW, 2013 F WL 1898633 (JCx) (CD Cal 2013) G Jones v. Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32, [2012] OJ No 148 H Juman v. Doucette, 2008 SCC 8, 290 DLR (4th) 193 Krinsky v. Doe 6, 159 Cal. App. 4th 1154, 72 Cal Rptr 3d 231 I (Cal. App. 6 Dist 2008) J M.(A.) v. Ryan, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 157, [1997] SCJ No 13 K R. v. O’Connor, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 411, [1995] SCJ No 98 VOLUME 4 L R. v. Spencer, 2011 SKCA 144, [2011] SJ No 729 M R. v. Trapp, 2011 SKCA 143, [2011] SJ No 728 N R. v. Ward, 2012 ONCA 660, [2012] OJ No 4587 Recording Industry Association of New Zealand Inc. v. O Enforcement Number: Telecom NZ 2592, [2013] NZCOP 2 Rugby Football Union v. Consolidated Information Services Ltd., P (formerly Viagogo Ltd) (in liquidation), [2012] UKSC 55, [2013] 1 All ER 928 Safety Point Products, LLC et al. v. Does 1-14, Does 15-96, Does Q 97-177, & Does 178-197, Case Nos. 1:12-CV-2812, 1:12-CV- 2820; 1:12-CV-2831; 1:12-CV-2894 (ND Ohio 2013) Tattered Cover, Inc. v. The City of Thornton, 44 P.3d 1044, (Colo R Sup Ct, en banc, 2002), 30 Media L Rep 1656 S Voltage v. Doe, 2013 FC 112 T Voltage Pictures LLC v. Jane Doe and John Doe, 2011 FC 1024 Voltage Pictures, LLC, v. Does 1-198, Does 1-12, Does 1-34, Does U 1-371, (6:13-cv-290-AA, 2:13-292-AA, 1:13-293-AA, 3:13-295- AA) (D Oregon 2013) V Warman v. Fournier, 2012 FC 803, [2012] FCJ No 851 W Warman v. Fournier et al., 210 ONSC 2126, [2010] OJ No 1846. ACADEMIC J. Cohen, “A Right to Read Anonymously: A Closer Look at X “Copyright Management” in Cyberspace”, (1996) 28 Conn. L. Rev. 981 S. Balganesh, “The Uneasy Case Against Copyright Trolls” (2013) Y 86 S. CAL. L. REV. (forthcoming) THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR SASKATCHEWAN Citation: 2011 SKCA 144 Date: 20111125 Between: Docket: 1862-CR Matthew David Spencer Appellant - and - 2011 SKCA 144 (CanLII) Her Majesty the Queen Respondent Between: Docket: 1857-CR Her Majesty the Queen Appellant - and - Matthew David Spencer Respondent Coram: Cameron, Ottenbreit & Caldwell JJ.A. Counsel: Ronald Piché for Mr. Spencer Anthony B. Gerein for the Crown Appeal: From: QBJ 21/08, J.C. of Saskatoon Heard: January 27, 2011 Disposition: Dismissed re 1862-CR Allowed re 1857-CR Written Reasons: November 25, 2011 By: The Honourable Mr. Justice Caldwell Concurring Reasons: The Honourable Mr. Justice Cameron Concurring Reasons: The Honourable Mr. Justice Ottenbreit 2011 SKCA 144 (CanLII) Page 1 Caldwell J.A. I. Introduction [1] Matthew David Spencer was charged in an indictment which read: MATTHEW DAVID SPENCER, of the City of Saskatoon, in the Province of Saskatchewan, stands charged that between the 31st day of August, A.D. 2007 and the 20th day of September, A.D. 2007 at or near Saskatoon in the Province of Saskatchewan did: 1) have in his possession child pornography to wit: images of children under the age of 18 engaged in explicit sexual activity, contrary to 2011 SKCA 144 (CanLII) Section 163.1(4) of the Criminal Code. 2) make available child pornography, when he did make images of children under the age of 18 engaged in explicit sexual activity available to other persons through the Internet, contrary to Section 163.1(3) of the Criminal Code. [2] Mr. Spencer appealed from his conviction on the first count of the indictment and the Crown appealed from Mr. Spencer’s acquittal on the second count of the indictment. [3] Following a brief recitation of the facts, I will address each appeal in turn. In sum, I would dismiss Mr. Spencer’s appeal from his conviction on the count of possession of child pornography and allow the Crown’s appeal from Mr. Spencer’s acquittal on the count of making available child pornography. II. Background Facts [4] Like the offender in R. v. Trapp, 2011 SKCA 143 (released concurrently with these reasons), Mr. Spencer obtained a number of computer files containing child pornography, both pictures and video, from others over the internet through his use of file-sharing software. Mr. Spencer used the Page 2 file-sharing software known as “LimeWire”. He retained the files he had downloaded in a “shared” folder on his personal computer and others were able to view and download his collection of child pornography using the same or similar file-sharing software. [5] It is important to understand how file-sharing programs like LimeWire function. A file-sharing program can search the shared folders of all of the computers which are running the same or a similar program and which happen 2011 SKCA 144 (CanLII) to be connected to the internet at the time of the search. The shared folder(s) on each of these node computers serves as a separate repository of files which other users can access using file-sharing software and from which other users may view and download files of their choosing. A file-sharing program usually accesses only the shared folder(s) and no other part of a node computer. A file-sharing program searches the aggregated shared folders of these node computers only for files which correspond to the search request input by a user. It is the file-sharing program which creates the shared folder on the user’s computer and which then saves downloaded files to that folder, usually without overt input from the user. However, when such a program is installed on a computer, the user can typically adjust a number of program settings, such as download speed, the order of presentation of search results, etc. With LimeWire at least, these settings include whether or not to share files; however, the default is set to share files (i.e., LimeWire will share the user’s files unless the user tells it not to do so, either at installation or some later time). Page 3 [6] At 12:46 p.m. on August 31, 2007, by using file-sharing software similar to that employed by Mr. Spencer and other publicly available software, Constable Darren Parisien (now a Detective Sergeant), of the Saskatoon Police Service Criminal Intelligence Section – Vice Unit, discovered files containing child pornography in the shared folder of a computer which was using internet protocol address 70.64.12.102 (the “IP Address”) to connect to the internet; however, Constable Parisien did not know who owned the computer or where it was located. Using yet other software and a database 2011 SKCA 144 (CanLII) compiled by another police service, Constable Parisien determined the IP Address was one of many assigned to Shaw Communications (“Shaw”) for use in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. [7] On the basis of this information, Sergeant Deb Altrogge, also of the Criminal Intelligence Section – Vice Unit, wrote to Shaw: Constable Darren Parisien … is investigating a criminal code offence pertaining to child pornography and the internet. We have opened [sic] file investigation in relation to this investigation. Pursuant to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), we request the disclosure of customer identifying information including but not limited to name, internet service provider records, address of service, current service status and phone number relevant to the following: 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Saskatoon Budget Book.Book
    City of Saskatoon 2015 APPROVED CORPORATE BUSINESS PLAN AND OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGETS Approved by City Council, DECEMBER 9, 2014 This document contains the details for the 2015 Approved Corporate Business Plan and Operating and Capital Budgets. This document is accompanied by the following companion documents: • 2015 Corporate Business Plan and Budget • 2015 Approved Capital Project Details Community Support ................................................................................................................................... 29 Animal Services ..................................................................................................................................................... 33 Community Development....................................................................................................................................... 34 Community Investments & Supports...................................................................................................................... 36 Cemeteries............................................................................................................................................................. 40 Corporate Asset Management................................................................................................................... 43 Facilities Management ........................................................................................................................................... 47 Fleet Services .......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • No. 11-16358 United States Court of Appeals for The
    Case: 11-16358 01/13/2012 ID: 8031869 DktEntry: 20 Page: 1 of 40 NO. 11-16358 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RIGHTHAVEN LLC, APPELLANT, V. CENTER FOR INTERCULTURAL ORGANIZING, and KAYSE JAMA, APPELLEES. On Appeal From The United States District Court For The District of Nevada Case No. 2:10-cv-01322-JCM-LRL Honorable James C. Mahan, District Judge BRIEF AMICI CURIAE OF ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION, DIGITAL MEDIA LAW PROJECT, PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE AND PROFESSORS IN SUPPORT OF AFFIRMANCE Kurt Opsahl (SBN 191303) Corynne McSherry (SBN 221504) ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION 454 Shotwell Street San Francisco, CA 94110 Telephone: (415) 436-9333 Facsimile: (415) 436-9993 [email protected] Attorneys for Amici Curiae Case: 11-16358 01/13/2012 ID: 8031869 DktEntry: 20 Page: 2 of 40 DISCLOSURE OF CORPORATE AFFILIATIONS AND OTHER ENTITIES WITH A DIRECT FINANCIAL INTEREST IN LITIGATION Pursuant to Rule 26.1 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Amici Curiae the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Digital Media Law Project, Public Knowledge, and the professor amici (collectively, “Amici”) state that none of the Amici have any parent corporation, and that no publicly held corporation owns 10% or more of the stock of any of the Amici. Dated: January 13, 2012 By: /s/ Kurt Opsahl Kurt Opsahl Corynne McSherry ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION 454 Shotwell Street San Francisco, CA 94110 Telephone: (415) 436-9333 Facsimile: (415) 436-9993 [email protected] Attorneys for Amici Curiae i Case: 11-16358 01/13/2012 ID: 8031869 DktEntry: 20 Page: 3 of 40 TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENTS OF INTEREST AND CONSENT TO FILE ................................
    [Show full text]
  • Teksavvy Solutions Inc. Consultation on the Technical and Policy
    TekSavvy Solutions Inc. Reply Comments in Consultation on the Technical and Policy Framework for the 3650-4200 MHz Band and Changes to the Frequency Allocation of the 3500-3650 MHz Band Canada Gazette, Part I, August 2020, Notice No. SLPB-002-20 November 30, 2020 TekSavvy Solutions Inc. Reply Comments to Consultation SLPB-002-20 TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Introduction ____________________________________________________________ 1 B. Arguments for option 1 and against option 2 _________________________________ 1 a. Contiguity ______________________________________________________________ 1 b. Availability of ecosystem in the 3900: impacts on viability_________________________ 3 c. Moratorium ____________________________________________________________ 4 d. Arguments for Improvements to Option 1 _____________________________________ 4 C. 3800 MHz Auction _______________________________________________________ 5 a. Value _________________________________________________________________ 5 b. Procompetitive Measures _________________________________________________ 5 c. Tier 4 and 5 Licensing Area ________________________________________________ 6 TekSavvy Solutions Inc. Page 1 of 6 Reply Comments to Consultation SLPB-002-20 A. INTRODUCTION 1. TekSavvy Solutions Inc. (“TekSavvy”) is submitting its reply comments on ISED’s “Consultation on the Technical and Policy Framework for the 3650-4200 MHz Band and Changes to the Frequency Allocation of the 3500-3650 MHz Band”. 2. TekSavvy reasserts its position in favour of Option 1 in that Consultation document, and its strong opposition to Option 2, as expressed in its original submission. TekSavvy rejects Option 2 as disastrous both for WBS service providers’ ongoing viability and availability of broadband service to rural subscribers. 3. TekSavvy supports Option 1, wherein WBS Licensees would be allowed to continue to operate in the band of 3650 to 3700 MHz indefinitely as the only option that enables continued investment in rural broadband networks and continued improvement of broadband services to rural subscribers.
    [Show full text]
  • January 11, 2019 the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review Panel C/O Innovation, Science and Economic Devel
    January 11, 2019 The Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review Panel c/o Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 235 Queen Street, 1st Floor Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H5 VMedia Inc. (“VMedia”) is grateful for the opportunity to submit comments on the broadcasting and telecommunications legislative review (the “Review”) initiated by Innovation, Science and Economic Development (“ISED”) Canada. Executive Summary The Review ES1.The issues outlined in the terms of reference and the themes described by the panel appointed by ISED to review the relevant legislation (the “Panel”) are extensive. There are seven terms of reference relating to issues to consider in connection with the Telecommunications and Radiocommunication Acts, and eight in connection with the Broadcasting Act. In addition, there are four themes set out by the Panel intended to “help guide its work and structure meaningful dialogue during its consultation process”. ES2.Among those 19 elements of consideration, we note that the word competition is mentioned only twice, with little elaboration or context. ES3.As the second point under both the Telecommunications and Radiocommunication Acts, under the heading “Competition, Innovation, and Affordability”, the question is asked, “Are legislative changes warranted to better promote competition, innovation and affordability?” ES4.In addition, competition is mentioned at the very end of the first of the Panel’s themes, “Reducing Barriers to Access by All Canadian to Advanced Telecommunications Networks”. All of the rest of that theme focuses on the achievements of telephone and cable companies, and the heavy lifting ahead of them as they keep up with digital transformation. ES5.There is no mention at all of competition in the terms of reference relating to the Broadcasting Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Telecom Order CRTC 2010-917
    Telecom Order CRTC 2010-917 PDF version Ottawa, 6 December 2010 TBayTel – Wireless Service Provider Enhanced 9-1-1 Network Access Service and 9-1-1 Public Emergency Reporting Service File numbers: Tariff Notices 151 and 151A Introduction 1. On 24 July 2009, TBayTel filed Tariff Notice 151, requesting approval for its revised General Tariff Section TB230, item 10, Wireless Service Provider Enhanced 9-1-1 Network Access Service (WSP E9-1-1 Service),1 and Section TB100, item 8, 9-1-1 Public Emergency Reporting Service (9-1-1 Public Service).2 TBayTel filed this application pursuant to certain requirements set out in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2009-40, in which the Commission mandated all incumbent local exchange carriers to file proposed revised WSP E9-1-1 Service tariffs associated with the implementation of Phase II Stage 1 of that service.3 The Commission approved the application, including TBayTel’s proposed monthly rate associated with the Phase I and Phase II Stage 1 elements of its WSP E9-1-1 Service and proposed rates associated with its 9-1-1 Public Service, on an interim basis in Telecom Order 2010-8, effective 1 February 2010. 2. On 4 February 2010, TBayTel filed Tariff Notice 151A to postpone the implementation date of its WSP E9-1-1 Service and 9-1-1 Public Service to 3 May 2010 due to technical and provisioning delays. The Commission approved that tariff notice on an interim basis in Telecom Order 2010-98, effective 3 May 2010. 3. The Commission received comments regarding TBayTel’s applications from Rogers Wireless Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Cologix Torix Case Study
    Internet Exchange Case Study The Toronto Internet Exchange (TorIX) is the largest IX in Canada with more than 175 peering participants benefiting from lower network costs & faster speeds The non-profit Toronto Internet Exchange (TorIX) is a multi-connection point enabling members to use one hardwired connection to exchange traffic with 175+ members on the exchange. With peering participants swapping traffic with one another through direct connections, TorIX reduces transit times for local data exchange and cuts the significant costs of Internet bandwidth. The success of TorIX is underlined by its tremendous growth, exceeding 145 Gbps as one of the largest IXs in the world. TorIX is in Cologix’s data centre at 151 Front Street, Toronto’s carrier hotel and the country’s largest telecommunications hub in the heart of Toronto. TorIX members define their own routing protocols to dictate their traffic flow, experiencing faster speeds with their data packets crossing fewer hops between the point of origin and destination. Additionally, by keeping traffic local, Canadian data avoids international networks, easing concerns related to privacy and security. Above: In Dec. 2014, TorIX traffic peaked above 140 Gbps, with average traffic hovering around 90 Gbps. Beginning Today Launched in July 1996 Direct TorIX on-ramp in Cologix’s151 Front Street Ethernet-based, layer 2 connectivity data centre in Toronto TorIX-owned switches capable of handling Second largest independent IX in North America ample traffic Operated by telecom industry volunteers IPv4 & IPv6 address provided to each peering Surpassed 145 Gbps with 175+ peering member to use on the IX participants, including the Canadian Broke the 61 Gbps mark in Jan.
    [Show full text]
  • TX-NR636 AV RECEIVER Advanced Manual
    TX-NR636 AV RECEIVER Advanced Manual CONTENTS AM/FM Radio Receiving Function 2 Using Remote Controller for Playing Music Files 15 TV operation 42 Tuning into a Radio Station 2 About the Remote Controller 15 Blu-ray Disc player/DVD player/DVD recorder Presetting an AM/FM Radio Station 2 Remote Controller Buttons 15 operation 42 Using RDS (European, Australian and Asian models) 3 Icons Displayed during Playback 15 VCR/PVR operation 43 Playing Content from a USB Storage Device 4 Using the Listening Modes 16 Satellite receiver / Cable receiver operation 43 CD player operation 44 Listening to Internet Radio 5 Selecting Listening Mode 16 Cassette tape deck operation 44 About Internet Radio 5 Contents of Listening Modes 17 To operate CEC-compatible components 44 TuneIn 5 Checking the Input Format 19 Pandora®–Getting Started (U.S., Australia and Advanced Settings 20 Advanced Speaker Connection 45 New Zealand only) 6 How to Set 20 Bi-Amping 45 SiriusXM Internet Radio (North American only) 7 1.Input/Output Assign 21 Connecting and Operating Onkyo RI Components 46 Slacker Personal Radio (North American only) 8 2.Speaker Setup 24 About RI Function 46 Registering Other Internet Radios 9 3.Audio Adjust 27 RI Connection and Setting 46 DLNA Music Streaming 11 4.Source Setup 29 iPod/iPhone Operation 47 About DLNA 11 5.Listening Mode Preset 32 Firmware Update 48 Configuring the Windows Media Player 11 6.Miscellaneous 33 About Firmware Update 48 DLNA Playback 11 7.Hardware Setup 33 Updating the Firmware via Network 48 Controlling Remote Playback from a PC 12 8.Remote Controller Setup 39 Updating the Firmware via USB 49 9.Lock Setup 39 Music Streaming from a Shared Folder 13 Troubleshooting 51 Operating Other Components Using Remote About Shared Folder 13 Reference Information 58 Setting PC 13 Controller 40 Playing from a Shared Folder 13 Functions of REMOTE MODE Buttons 40 Programming Remote Control Codes 40 En AM/FM Radio Receiving Function Tuning into stations manually 2.
    [Show full text]
  • BCE Inc. 2015 Annual Report
    Leading the way in communications BCE INC. 2015 ANNUAL REPORT for 135 years BELL LEADERSHIP AND INNOVATION PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE OUR GOAL For Bell to be recognized by customers as Canada’s leading communications company OUR STRATEGIC IMPERATIVES Invest in broadband networks and services 11 Accelerate wireless 12 Leverage wireline momentum 14 Expand media leadership 16 Improve customer service 18 Achieve a competitive cost structure 20 Bell is leading Canada’s broadband communications revolution, investing more than any other communications company in the fibre networks that carry advanced services, in the products and content that make the most of the power of those networks, and in the customer service that makes all of it accessible. Through the rigorous execution of our 6 Strategic Imperatives, we gained further ground in the marketplace and delivered financial results that enable us to continue to invest in growth services that now account for 81% of revenue. Financial and operational highlights 4 Letters to shareholders 6 Strategic imperatives 11 Community investment 22 Bell archives 24 Management’s discussion and analysis (MD&A) 28 Reports on internal control 112 Consolidated financial statements 116 Notes to consolidated financial statements 120 2 We have re-energized one of Canada’s most respected brands, transforming Bell into a competitive force in every communications segment. Achieving all our financial targets for 2015, we strengthened our financial position and continued to create value for shareholders. DELIVERING INCREASED
    [Show full text]
  • Media and Internet Concentration in Canada, 1984-2018
    MEDIA AND INTERNET CONCENTRATION IN CANADA, 1984-2018 REPORT DECEMBER 2019 Canadian Media Concentration Research Project Research Canadian Media Concentration www.cmcrp.org Candian Media Concentration Research Project x The Canadian Media Concentration Research project is directed by Professor Dwayne Winseck, School of Journalism and Communication, Carleton University. The project was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council between 2012 and 2018, after which the Faculty of Public Affairs at Carleton University generously stepped in to provide bridge funding for the next two years of the project. The overall objective of the CMCR Project is to develop a comprehensive, systematic and long-term analysis of the telecoms, internet and media industries in Canada to better inform public and policy-related discussions about these issues. Professor Winseck can be reached at either [email protected] or 613 769- 7587 (mobile). Open Access to CMCR Project Data CMCR Project data can be freely downloaded and used under Creative Commons licensing arrangements for non-commercial purposes with proper attribution and in accordance with the ShareAlike principles set out in the International License 4.0. Explicit, written permission is required for any other use that does not follow these principles. Our data sets are available for download here and also available in our long term data archive hosted on the CMCRP Dataverse. Dataverse is a publicly-accessible repository of scholarly works created and maintained by a consortium of Canadian universities. All works and datasets deposited in our CMCRP Dataverse are given a permanent DOI, so as to not be lost when a website becomes no longer available—a form of “dead media”.
    [Show full text]
  • Frivolous And/Or Pursued in Bad Faith
    Case 2:10-cv-01356-RLH-RJJ Document 44 Filed 12/07/10 Page 1 of 38 1 LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CA State Bar No. 115163) (pro hac vice) [email protected] 2 CLIFFORD C. WEBB (CA State Bar No. 260885) (pro hac vice pending) [email protected] 3 FENWICK & WEST LLP 555 California Street, 12th Floor 4 San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: (415) 875-2300 5 Facsimile: (415) 281-1350 6 KURT OPSAHL (CA State Bar No. 191303) (pro hac vice) [email protected] 7 CORYNNE MCSHERRY (CA State Bar No. 221504) (pro hac vice) [email protected] 8 ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION 454 Shotwell Street 9 San Francisco, California 94110 Telephone: (415) 436-9333 10 Facsimile: (415) 436-9993 11 CHAD BOWERS (NV State Bar No. 7283) [email protected] 12 CHAD A. BOWERS, LTD 3202 West Charleston Boulevard 13 Las Vegas, Nevada 89102 Telephone: (702) 457-1001 14 Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND, LLC, and 15 Defendant DAVID ALLEN 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA 17 RIGHTHAVEN LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, ) Case No. 2:10-cv-01356-RLH 18 Plaintiff, ) (RJJ) v. ) 19 ) ) CONSOLIDATED BRIEF DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND, LLC, a District of ) IN OPPOSITION TO 20 Columbia limited-liability company; and DAVID ALLEN, an individual, ) PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 21 ) FOR VOLUNTARY Defendants. ) DISMISSAL TO THE 22 ) EXTENT IT SEEKS TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND, LLC, a District of ) FORECLOSE AWARD OF 23 Columbia limited-liability company, ) ATTORNEYS’ FEES, AND ) IN SUPPORT OF CROSS- Counterclaimant, 24 ) MOTION FOR SUMMARY v. ) JUDGMENT 25 ) RIGHTHAVEN LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, ) 26 and STEPHENS MEDIA LLC, a Nevada limited-liability ) company, ) 27 ) Counterdefendants.
    [Show full text]
  • Free Speech Group Fights Lawsuits Vs. News Sharers 30 September 2010, by CRISTINA SILVA , Associated Press Writer
    Free speech group fights lawsuits vs. news sharers 30 September 2010, By CRISTINA SILVA , Associated Press Writer (AP) -- A San Francisco group that defends online "That's just ridiculous, and the reason it is ridiculous free speech is taking on a Las Vegas company it is that I don't think there has been any defendant says is shaking down news-sharing Internet users that we've called to shake them down for a through more than 140 copyright infringement settlement," he said. lawsuits filed this year. Dozens of the lawsuits have been settled privately, The Electronic Frontier Foundation's counterclaim and Righthaven and Stephens Media declined to represents the first significant challenge to disclose the terms. The EFF says the settlements Righthaven LLC's unprecedented campaign to have averaged about $5,000. police the sharing of news content on blogs, political sites and personal Web pages. Movie and music producers have previously targeted individuals who illegally share copyright At stake is what constitutes fair use - when and content. What makes Righthaven's business model how it is appropriate to share content in an age unique is that it buys copyrights from news where newsmakers increasingly encourage companies like Stephens Media and then readers to share stories on Facebook, Twitter, aggressively files lawsuits without first giving Digg and other social networking sites. defendants a chance to remove the content in question. The EFF argues that the lawsuits limit free speech and bully defendants into costly settlements by Allen Lichtenstein, a lawyer for the Nevada threatening $150,000 in damages and the transfer American Civil Liberties Union, said the lawsuits of domain names.
    [Show full text]
  • RIGHTHAVEN LLC, No
    FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RIGHTHAVEN LLC, No. 11-16751 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 2:11-cv-00050- PMP-RJJ WAYNE HOEHN, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Philip M. Pro, District Judge, Presiding RIGHTHAVEN LLC, No. 11-16776 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 2:10-cv-01343- RLH-PAL THOMAS A. DIBIASE, Defendant-Appellee. OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Roger L. Hunt, Senior District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted February 5, 2013—Pasadena, California 2 RIGHTHAVEN LLC V. HOEHN Filed May 9, 2013 Before: Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain, Stephen S. Trott, and Richard R. Clifton, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge Clifton SUMMARY* Copyright The panel affirmed the dismissal for lack of standing of two copyright infringement suits and vacated the portion of the district court’s order granting summary judgment on fair use in one of the suits. The panel held that agreements assigning plaintiff Righthaven LLC the bare right to sue for infringement of newspaper articles, without the transfer of any associated exclusive rights in the articles, did not confer standing to sue. The panel held that the district court therefore lacked jurisdiction to rule in the alternative on the fair use defense. * This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. RIGHTHAVEN LLC V. HOEHN 3 COUNSEL Erik S. Syverson (argued), Miller Barondess, LLP, Los Angeles, California, and Shawn A.
    [Show full text]