DOCSLIB.ORG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT of NEW YORK in Re: SONY BMG CD TECHNOLOGIES LITIGATION Case No. 1:05-Cv-09575-NR

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT of NEW YORK in Re: SONY BMG CD TECHNOLOGIES LITIGATION Case No. 1:05-Cv-09575-NR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re: SONY BMG CD Case No. 1:05-cv-09575-NRB TECHNOLOGIES LITIGATION MOTION AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT GIRARD GIBBS KAMBER & ASSOCIATES LLC & De BARTOLOMEO LLP Scott A. Kamber (SK-5794) Daniel C. Girard (Pro Hac Vice) 19 Fulton Street, Suite 400 Jonathan K. Levine (JL-8390) New York, NY 10038 Elizabeth C. Pritzker (Pro Hac Vice) Telephone: (212) 571-2000 Aaron M. Sheanin (Pro Hac Vice) 601 California Street, Suite 1400 San Francisco, California 94108 Telephone: (415) 981-4800 Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel www.girardgibbs.com TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 II. BACKGROUND OF THE LITIGATION.......................................................................... 3 A. The Nature Of SONY BMG’s Content Protection Software.............................................. 3 B. XCP CDs And Software Expose Computers To Security Vulnerabilities ......................... 4 C. MediaMax CD Software Installs Without Consent And Exposes Computers To Security Vulnerabilities .............................................................................. 6 D. The Class Action Litigation................................................................................................ 6 III. THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT..................................................................................... 8 A. The Settlement Class........................................................................................................... 8 B. The Settlement Consideration............................................................................................. 9 1. XCP CD Exchange Program......................................................................................... 10 2. MediaMax Compensation............................................................................................. 11 3. XCP And MediaMax Software Updates And Uninstallers........................................... 11 4. SONY BMG Will Not Collect Personal Data............................................................... 13 5. Defendants Will Waive Rights Under XCP And MediaMax EULAs.......................... 13 6. The Settlement Contains “Most Favored Nations” Protection ..................................... 14 7. Injunctive Relief Required By The Settlement Will Effectuate Changes In Defendants’ Use Of Content Protection Software................................................... 14 C. Release Of Claims............................................................................................................. 15 D. Defendants’ Limited Right To Withdraw From Settlement ............................................. 17 IV. PRELIMINARY SETTLEMENT APPROVAL .............................................................. 18 A. The Role Of The Court ..................................................................................................... 18 B. The Proposed Settlement Class May Be Certified Under Amchem.................................. 19 www.girardgibbs.com i 1. Plaintiffs Have Met All Of The Prerequisites Under Rule 23(a).................................. 20 2. The Court Should Certify The Settlement Class Under Rule 23(b)(3)......................... 21 3. The Court Should Appoint Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel As Class Counsel ................ 22 C. Criteria To Be Considered In Deciding Preliminary Approval ........................................ 23 1. There Are No Grounds To Doubt The Fairness Of The Settlement, Which Is The Product Of Extensive, Arm’s-Length Negotiations............................... 26 2. The Settlement Contains No Obvious Deficiencies...................................................... 27 3. The Settlement Falls Within The Range Of Possible Approval ................................... 29 V. THE PROPOSED PLAN OF CLASS NOTICE............................................................... 31 VII. CONCLUSION................................................................................................................. 35 www.girardgibbs.com ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Page(s) Amchem Prods. Inc. v. Windsor 521 U.S. 591 (1997)...................................................................................................................... 19 Armstrong v. Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee 616 F.2d 305 (7th Cir. 1980) ......................................................................................................... 23 Blackie v. Barrack 524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir. 1975) ......................................................................................................... 21 Denney v. Jenkens & Gilchrist 230 F.R.D. 317 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) .................................................................................................. 19 Detroit v. Grinnell Corp. 495 F.2d 448 (2d Cir. 1974).......................................................................................................... 24 Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin 417 U.S. 156 (1974)...................................................................................................................... 31 In re Airline Ticket Comm’n Antitrust Litig. 953 F. Supp. 280 (D. Minn. 1997)................................................................................................ 33 In re Automotive Refinishing Paint Antitrust Litig. 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4681 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 17, 2003)................................................................ 26 In re Compact Disc Minimum Advertised Price Antitrust Litig. 216 F.R.D. 197 (D. Me. 2003)...................................................................................................... 32 In re Initial Pub. Offering Sec. Litig. 226 F.R.D. 186 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) ...................................................................................... 18, 23, 24 In re Inter-Op Hip Prosthesis Liab. Litig. 204 F.R.D. 359 (N.D. Ohio 2001) ................................................................................................ 27 In re Medical X-Ray Film Antitrust Litig. 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21936 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 10, 1997) ............................................................ 26 In re Michael Milken & Assoc. Sec. Litig. 150 F.R.D. 46 (S.D.N.Y. 1993) ................................................................................................... 18 www.girardgibbs.com iii In re NASDAQ Market-Makers Antitrust Litig. 176 F.R.D. 99 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) .............................................................................................. 18, 23 In re Prudential Sec. Inc. Ltd. P’ships Litig. 163 F.R.D. 200 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) ...................................................................................... 23, 24, 26 In re Serzone Prods. Liab. Litig. 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30468 (S.D.W.Va. Sep. 2, 2005) ............................................................ 33 In re Shell Oil Refinery 155 F.R.D. 552 (E.D. La. 1993).................................................................................................... 27 In re Visa Check/Mastermoney Antitrust Litig. 280 F.3d 124 (2d Cir. 2001).................................................................................................... 19, 21 In re Warner Comms. Sec. Litig. 798 F.2d 35 (2d Cir. 1986)............................................................................................................ 18 Lyons v. Marrud, Inc. [1972-1973 Transfer Binder] Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 93 (S.D.N.Y. 1972) ............................ 25 Maywalt v. Parker & Parsley Petroleum Co. 67 F.3d 1072 (2d Cir. 1995).......................................................................................................... 25 McNamara v. Bre-X Minerals Ltd. 214 F.R.D. 424 (E.D. Tex. 2002).................................................................................................. 26 Philadelphia Housing Auth. v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp. 323 F. Supp. 364 (E.D. Pa. 1970) ................................................................................................. 24 Reed v. General Motors Corp. 703 F.2d 170 (5th Cir. 1983) ................................................................................................... 25, 26 Saylor v. Lindsley 456 F.2d 896 (2d Cir. 1972).......................................................................................................... 24 Soberal-Perez v. Heckler 717 F.2d 36 (2d Cir. 1983)............................................................................................................ 31 Spann v. AOL Time Warner, Inc. 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10848 (S.D.N.Y. June 7, 2005) .............................................................. 28 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Visa U.S.A. Inc. 396 F.3d 96 (2d Cir. 2005)................................................................................................ 24, 31, 33 Weinberger v. Kendrick 698 F.2d 61 (2d Cir. 1982)............................................................................................................ 31 www.girardgibbs.com iv STATUTES 18 U.S.C. § 1030, et seq.................................................................................................................. 8 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) ............................................................................................................... 19, 20 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1)................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Information Disclosure Mechanism for Technological Protection Measures in China
    Journal of Intellectual Property Rights Vol 17, November 2012, pp 532-538 Information Disclosure Mechanism for Technological Protection Measures in China Lili Zhao† Center for China Information Security Law, Xi’an Jiao tong University, Shaanxi Xi’an, P R China 710 049 Received 12 February 2012, revised 21 May 2012 With increasing cases of digital works being copied and pirated, technological protection measures have been greatly favoured by copyright owners for protecting the intellectual property in their digital works, while ensuring that these works can be used and disseminated. However, when any copyright owner or supplier fails to disclose the information of technological protection measures appropriately or effectively, damages such as privacy violations, security breaches and unfair competition may be caused to the public. Therefore, it is necessary to establish an information disclosure mechanism for technological protection measures, make the labeling obligation with regard to technological protection measures by copyright owners apparent and warning to security risks obligatory by legislation; effectively guarding against information security threats from the technological protection measures. Keywords: Technological protection measures, TPM, information disclosure, label and warning The advance of digital technologies make many information security, it is necessary to integrate such acts things become possible, including the copy and in a standardized, normalized and legal manner. dissemination of commercially valuable digital works Therefore, to further prevent copyright owners from through global digital network. Particularly, among using insecure or untested software, protect information the copyright owners of entertainment industry, security and prohibit the abuse of TPMs; disclosure technological protection measures (TPMs) have been obligations should be established for the right holders of regarded as a necessary creation to help digital works TPMs in the form of legislation.
    [Show full text]
  • ABBREVIATIONS EBU Technical Review
    ABBREVIATIONS EBU Technical Review AbbreviationsLast updated: January 2012 720i 720 lines, interlaced scan ACATS Advisory Committee on Advanced Television 720p/50 High-definition progressively-scanned TV format Systems (USA) of 1280 x 720 pixels at 50 frames per second ACELP (MPEG-4) A Code-Excited Linear Prediction 1080i/25 High-definition interlaced TV format of ACK ACKnowledgement 1920 x 1080 pixels at 25 frames per second, i.e. ACLR Adjacent Channel Leakage Ratio 50 fields (half frames) every second ACM Adaptive Coding and Modulation 1080p/25 High-definition progressively-scanned TV format ACS Adjacent Channel Selectivity of 1920 x 1080 pixels at 25 frames per second ACT Association of Commercial Television in 1080p/50 High-definition progressively-scanned TV format Europe of 1920 x 1080 pixels at 50 frames per second http://www.acte.be 1080p/60 High-definition progressively-scanned TV format ACTS Advanced Communications Technologies and of 1920 x 1080 pixels at 60 frames per second Services AD Analogue-to-Digital AD Anno Domini (after the birth of Jesus of Nazareth) 21CN BT’s 21st Century Network AD Approved Document 2k COFDM transmission mode with around 2000 AD Audio Description carriers ADC Analogue-to-Digital Converter 3DTV 3-Dimension Television ADIP ADress In Pre-groove 3G 3rd Generation mobile communications ADM (ATM) Add/Drop Multiplexer 4G 4th Generation mobile communications ADPCM Adaptive Differential Pulse Code Modulation 3GPP 3rd Generation Partnership Project ADR Automatic Dialogue Replacement 3GPP2 3rd Generation Partnership
    [Show full text]
  • Intellectual Property Part 2 Pornography
    Intellectual Property Part 2 Pornography By Jeremy Parmenter What is pornography Pornography is the explicit portrayal of sexual subject matter Can be found as books, magazines, videos The web has images, tube sites, and pay sites scattered with porn Statistics 12% of total websites are pornography websites 25% of total daily search engine requests are pornographic requests 42.7% of internet users who view pornography 34% internet users receive unwanted exposure to sexual material $4.9 billion in internet pornography sales 11 years old is the average age of first internet exposure to pornography Innovations ● Richard Gordon created an e-commerce start up in mid- 90s that was used on many sites, most notably selling Pamela Anderson/Tommey Lee sex tape ● Danni Ashe founded Danni's Hard Drive with one of the first streaming video without requiring a plug-in ● Adult content sites were one of the first to use traffic optimization by linking to similar sites ● Live chat during the early days of the web ● Pornographic companies were known to give away broadband devices to promote faster connections Negative Impacts ● Between 2001-2002 adult-oriented spam rose 450% ● Malware such as Trojans and video codecs occur most often on porn sites ● Domain hijacking, using fake documents and information to steal a site ● Pop-ups preventing users from leaving the site or infecting their computer ● Browser hijacking adware or spyware manipulating the browser to change home page or search engine to a bogus site, including pay-per-click adult site ● Accessibility
    [Show full text]
  • Compilation of Manuals, Guidelines, and Directories in the Area of Intellectual Property (Ip) Portfolio Management
    DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION COMPILATION OF MANUALS, GUIDELINES, AND DIRECTORIES IN THE AREA OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (IP) PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT CUSTOMIZED FOR THE ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN NATIONS (ASEAN) MEMBER COUNTRIES TABLE OF CONTENTS page 1. Preface…………………………………………………………………. 4 2. Mission Report of Mr. Lee Yuke Chin, Regional Consultant………… 5 3. Overview of ASEAN Companies interviewed in the Study……...…… 22 4. ASEAN COUNTRIES 4. 1. Brunei Darussalam Part I: Listing of Manuals, Guidelines and Directories in the Area of Intellectual Property (IP) Portfolio Management………………………. 39 Part II: Success Stories…………………………………………………. 53 4. 2. Cambodia Part I: Listing of Manuals, Guidelines and Directories in the Area of Intellectual Property (IP) Portfolio Management………………………. 66 Part II: Success Stories…………………………………………………. 85 4. 3. Indonesia Part I: Listing of Manuals, Guidelines and Directories in the Area of Intellectual Property (IP) Portfolio Management………………………. 96 Part II: Success Stories…………………………………………………. 113 4. 4. Lao PDR Part I: Listing of Manuals, Guidelines and Directories in the Area of Intellectual Property (IP) Portfolio Management………………………. 127 Part II: Success Stories…………………………………………………. 144 4. 5. Malaysia Part I: Listing of Manuals, Guidelines and Directories in the Area of Intellectual Property (IP) Portfolio Management………………………. 156 Part II: Success Stories…………………………………………………. 191 4. 6. Myanmar Part I: Listing of Manuals, Guidelines and Directories in the Area of Intellectual Property (IP) Portfolio Management………………………. 213 Part II: Success Stories…………………………………………………. 232 4. 7. Philippines Part I: Listing of Manuals, Guidelines and Directories in the Area of Intellectual Property (IP) Portfolio Management………………………. 248 Part II: Success Stories…………………………………………………. 267 4. 8. Singapore Part I: Listing of Manuals, Guidelines and Directories in the Area of Intellectual Property (IP) Portfolio Management……………………….
    [Show full text]
  • A SONY PICTURES CLASSICS RELEASE Www
    A SONY PICTURES CLASSICS RELEASE www.itmightgetloudmovie.com Running time: 97 minutes *Official Selection: 2008 Toronto International Film Festival *Official Selection: 2009 Sundance Film Festival Publicity Distributor PMK/HBH Sony Pictures Classics Allen Eichhorn Carmelo Pirrone 622 Third Avenue Lindsay Macik 8th Floor 550 Madison Ave New York, NY 10017 New York, NY 10022 212-373-6115 Tel: 212-833-8833 [email protected] Short Synopsis Rarely can a film penetrate the glamorous surface of rock legends. It Might Get Loud tells the personal stories, in their own words, of three generations of electric guitar virtuosos – The Edge (U2), Jimmy Page (Led Zeppelin), and Jack White (The White Stripes). It reveals how each developed his unique sound and style of playing favorite instruments, guitars both found and invented. Concentrating on the artist’s musical rebellion, traveling with him to influential locations, provoking rare discussion as to how and why he writes and plays, this film lets you witness intimate moments and hear new music from each artist. The movie revolves around a day when Jimmy Page, Jack White, and The Edge first met and sat down together to share their stories, teach and play. Long Synopsis Who hasn't wanted to be a rock star, join a band or play electric guitar? Music resonates, moves and inspires us. Strummed through the fingers of The Edge, Jimmy Page and Jack White, somehow it does more. Such is the premise of It Might Get Loud, a new documentary conceived by producer Thomas Tull. It Might Get Loud isn't like any other rock'n roll documentary.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons from the Sony CD DRM Episode
    Lessons from the Sony CD DRM Episode J. Alex Halderman and Edward W. Felten Center for Information Technology Policy Department of Computer Science Princeton University Abstract system called XCP that had been installed when he in- In the fall of 2005, problems discovered in two Sony- serted a Sony-BMG music CD into his computer’s CD BMG compact disc copy protection systems, XCP and drive. MediaMax, triggered a public uproar that ultimately led News of Russinovich’s discovery circulated rapidly on to class-action litigation and the recall of millions of the Internet, and further revelations soon followed, from discs. We present an in-depth analysis of these technolo- us,1 from Russinovich, and from others. It was discov- gies, including their design, implementation, and deploy- ered that the XCP rootkit makes users’ systems more ment. The systems are surprisingly complex and suffer vulnerable to attacks, that both CD DRM schemes install from a diverse array of flaws that weaken their content risky software components without obtaining informed protection and expose users to serious security and pri- consent from users, that both systems covertly transmit vacy risks. Their complexity, and their failure, makes usage information back to the vendor or the music label, them an interesting case study of digital rights manage- and that none of the protected discs include tools for unin- ment that carries valuable lessons for content companies, stalling the software. (For these reasons, both XCP and DRM vendors, policymakers, end users, and the security MediaMax seem to meet the consensus definition of spy- community. ware.) These and other findings outraged many users.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Price Discriminiation, Rootkits and Flatrates
    Of Price Discriminiation, Rootkits and Flatrates Volker Grassmuck Helmholtz-Zentrum für Kulturtechnik, Humboldt-University Berlin 19 February 2006 DRAFT VERSION – final version is slated for print publication Licensed under Creative Commons Share-Alike Germany 2.0 „Copyright owners continue to be ambivalent about the Internet. On the one hand, it represents a fantastic new medium for distribution; on the other, many in the publishing industry see it as one ‚giant, out of control copying machine.‘ ... The very technological advances that make rights management more difficult – the dramatic reduction in costs of copying and distribution – also offer a fantastic opportunity for owners of intellectual content.“1 Without scarcity there is no market. Information by its nature is a public good.2 Copyright law artificially creates scarcity by granting exclusive rights to it for a limited time. Media technology so far helped enforcability of those rights because the means of production and the means of distribution of informational goods were expensive and therefore scarce. The digital revolution does away with this scarcity. PC and Internet bring to virtually everyone the power of the printing press and the recording studio. Only now, information‘s defining qualities of non-rivalrousness and non-excludability come to full bearing. Zero cost for reproduction and distribution is indeed a fantastic value proposition for information vendors. Alas, it is undermined by the fact that for consumers the cost of copying and distribution is zero as well. Peer-to-peer networks show that transporting bits from A to B is now such a low-cost service that users can effortlessly provide it to each other.
    [Show full text]
  • Case No COMP/M.3333 Œ SONY / BMG
    EN This text is made available for information purposes only. A summary of this decision is published in all Community languages in the Official Journal of the European Union. Case No COMP/M.3333 – SONY / BMG Only the English text is authentic. REGULATION (EC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 8 (2) Date: 03/10/2007 COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 03/X/2007 C(2007) 4507 PUBLIC VERSION COMMISSION DECISION of 03/X/2007 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.3333 – Sony/ BMG) 2 I. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 11 II. THE PARTIES.......................................................................................................... 12 III. THE CONCENTRATION ........................................................................................ 12 IV. COMMUNITY DIMENSION .................................................................................. 12 V. RELEVANT MARKETS.......................................................................................... 13 A. RELEVANT PRODUCT MARKET .............................................................. 13 1. PHYSICAL RECORDED MUSIC ................................................... 13 2. RECORDED MUSIC IN DIGITAL FORMATS ............................. 14 a) Introduction ....................................................................... 14 b) The wholesale market for licensing of digital music ........ 15 c) The digital
    [Show full text]
  • Abkürzungs-Liste ABKLEX
    Abkürzungs-Liste ABKLEX (Informatik, Telekommunikation) W. Alex 1. Juli 2021 Karlsruhe Copyright W. Alex, Karlsruhe, 1994 – 2018. Die Liste darf unentgeltlich benutzt und weitergegeben werden. The list may be used or copied free of any charge. Original Point of Distribution: http://www.abklex.de/abklex/ An authorized Czechian version is published on: http://www.sochorek.cz/archiv/slovniky/abklex.htm Author’s Email address: [email protected] 2 Kapitel 1 Abkürzungen Gehen wir von 30 Zeichen aus, aus denen Abkürzungen gebildet werden, und nehmen wir eine größte Länge von 5 Zeichen an, so lassen sich 25.137.930 verschiedene Abkür- zungen bilden (Kombinationen mit Wiederholung und Berücksichtigung der Reihenfol- ge). Es folgt eine Auswahl von rund 16000 Abkürzungen aus den Bereichen Informatik und Telekommunikation. Die Abkürzungen werden hier durchgehend groß geschrieben, Akzente, Bindestriche und dergleichen wurden weggelassen. Einige Abkürzungen sind geschützte Namen; diese sind nicht gekennzeichnet. Die Liste beschreibt nur den Ge- brauch, sie legt nicht eine Definition fest. 100GE 100 GBit/s Ethernet 16CIF 16 times Common Intermediate Format (Picture Format) 16QAM 16-state Quadrature Amplitude Modulation 1GFC 1 Gigabaud Fiber Channel (2, 4, 8, 10, 20GFC) 1GL 1st Generation Language (Maschinencode) 1TBS One True Brace Style (C) 1TR6 (ISDN-Protokoll D-Kanal, national) 247 24/7: 24 hours per day, 7 days per week 2D 2-dimensional 2FA Zwei-Faktor-Authentifizierung 2GL 2nd Generation Language (Assembler) 2L8 Too Late (Slang) 2MS Strukturierte
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2015 Entertain. Inform. Engage
    Annual Report 2015 Entertain. Inform. Engage. Key fi gures SHARE PRICE PERFORMANCE 30/04/2013 – 31/12/2015* + 42.7 % )RTL GROUP + 54.5 % MDAX + 48.1 % DJ STOXX 600 INDEX = 100 * RTL Group shares have been listed in the Prime Standard of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange since 30 April 2013. RTL GROUP REVENUE SPLIT In 2015, TV advertising accounted for 49.4 per cent of RTL Group’s total revenue, making the Group one of the most diversified groups when it comes to revenue. Content represented 22 per cent of the total, while greater exposure to fast-growing digital revenue streams and higher margin platform revenue will further improve the mix. 11.8 % OTHER 8.4 % DIGITAL 49.4 % TV ADVERTISING 22.0 % CONTENT 4.1 % PLATFORM REVENUE 4.3 % RADIO ADVERTISING Key fi gures REVENUE 2011 – 2015 (€ million) EBITA 2011 – 2015 (€ million) 15 6,029 15 1,167 14 5,808 14 1,144* 13 5,824* 13 1,148** 12 5,998 12 1,078 11 5,765 11 1,134 * Restated for IFRS 11 * Restated for changes in purchase price allocation ** Restated for IFRS 11 NET PROFIT ATTRIBUTABLE TO RTL GROUP SHAREHOLDERS 2011 – 2015 (€ million) EQUITY 2011 – 2015 (€ million) 15 789 15 3,409 14 652* 14 3,275* 13 870 13 3,593 12 597 12 4,858 11 696 11 5,093 * Restated for changes in purchase price allocation * Restated for changes in purchase price allocation TOTAL DIVIDEND/ MARKET CAPITALISATION* 2011 – 2015 (€ billion) DIVIDEND YIELD PER SHARE 2011 – 2015 (€ )(%) 15 11.9 15 4.00* 4.9 14 12.2 14 5.50** 6.8 13 14.4 13 7.00*** 10.0 12 11.7 12 10.50 13.9 11 11.9 11 5.10 6.6 * As of 31 December * Including
    [Show full text]
  • SONY BMG Music Entertainment. Respondent. This Assurance Of
    In the Matter of: SONY BMG Music Entertainment. Respondent. This Assuranceof Voluntary Complianceor Discontinuance('oAssurance") is enteredinto by the AttorneysGeneral of the Statesof Alabama,Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas,Connecticut, Delawareo Florida,Idatro,Illinois, Indiana,Iow4 Kentucky,Louisian4 Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan,Mississippi, Montana" Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey,New Mexico,New york, North Carolina,North Dakota,Ohio, Oklahoma,Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota,Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington,West Virginia, Wisconsin,and Wyoming, and by the Attorney Generalfor the District of Columbia("the States"),acting pursuantto their respectiveconsumet protection statutes,r and SONY BMG Music Entertainment(.SONy I ALABAMA: AlabamaDeceptive Trade Practices Act, Ala. Codeg 8-19-1,et seq.;ALASKA: Unfair TradePractices and Consumer Protection Act, AS 45.50.471,-etseq.;ARIZbNA: Arizonaconsumer lrf{191, A.R.s. $ 44-1521et seq.;ARKANSAS: Ark. stat.Ann., g 4-gg- l0l et seq.;COIYNECTICUT: Conn.Gen. Stat. $ 42-110a,et seq.; DELAWARE: Consumer FraudAct,6 Del.C.$251l, et seq.;DISTRICT OF COLUMBI* Districrof Columbia ConsumerProtection Procedures Act, D.C. Code$ 28-3901et seq.; FLORIDA: Deceptiveand Unfair TradePractices Act, Fla. Stat.Ch. 501.201et seq.;IDAHO: IdahoConsumer protection Act, IdahoCode $ 48-601,et seq.;ILLINOIS: ConsumerFraud and Deceptive Business PracticesAct, 815ILcs 505/l et seq.;INDIANA: Ind.code Ann. $24-5-b-5-l;IowA: Iowa ConsumerFraud Act, Iowa Codesection714.16; KENTUCKY: ConsumerProtection Act, Ky. Rev. Stat.$$ 367.1l0 to 367.990;LOUISIANA: Unfair Tradepractices and Consumer ProtectionLaw,La. Rev. Stat.Ann. $$51:1401to 5|:1420;MAINE: MaineUnfair Trade PracticesAct, 5 M.R.S.A.sections 207 and209;MARYLANDI MarylandConsumer protection Act, Md.
    [Show full text]
  • The European IP Bulletin
    The European IP Bulletin The Intellectual Property, Media & Technology Department Issue 28, January 2006 McDermott Will & Emery UK LLP 7 Bishopsgate London EC2N 3AR Tel: +44 20 7577 6900 Fax: +44 20 7577 6950 www.mwe.com www.mwe.com/london Boston Brussels Chicago Düsseldorf London Los Angeles Miami Munich New York Orange County Rome San Diego Silicon Valley Washington, D.C. SUMMARY OF PAGE CONTENTS NO. HOT TOPICS 1. WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION MEMBERS AGREE TO AMEND THE 1 TRIPS AGREEMENT ON PATENTS AND PUBLIC HEALTH The decision of the General Council of 6 December 2005 on the amendment of the TRIPS Agreement makes the flexibilities contained in the 2003 decision on patents and public health permanent. This in effect will lead to the first amendment of a core WTO Agreement. 2. UK CHANCELLOR ANNOUNCES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REVIEW 2 As part of his Pre-Budget Report Package, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, has announced the launch of an independent review of intellectual property in the UK, to be headed by the former editor of the Financial Times. COPYRIGHT 3. SONY BMG’S ANTI-PIRACY SOFTWARE IN BIG TROUBLE 3 Sony BMG’s trouble started immediately following Windows programming expert Mark Russinovich's discovery that Sony’s anti- piracy software used virus-like techniques to stop illegal copies being made. There have been several class action lawsuits launched against both Sony BMG and First4Internet. Widespread pressure has made Sony BMG take actions to settle the dispute. 4. EVALUATION OF EU RULES ON DATABASES 4 The European Commission has published an evaluation of the protection EU law gives to databases.
    [Show full text]