LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

METALLICA et al. v NAPSTER INC Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: N42139, CourtName: MISC 1, Plaintiff: METALLICA et al., UniqueCaseRef: LCD>N42139, State: MA Massachusetts, Napster, District Court, Recording, Internet, Technology, Sony, Copyright Law, United States, Mp3 Files, Audio, Cir, Infringement, Istrict, Law School, Distribution, Injunction, School, Evidence, Decl, Report, Artists, Consumers, California, Infringing, Recordings, Architecture, Jerry Leiber, Compression, Watermarking, Orn, Rights, Downloads, Infringing Files, Tes, Mhp, General Partnership, Economics, Materials, Napster System, Peer-to-peer File Sharing, Regulation, Cyberspace, Mp3, Exh, Sales , ContentID: 120243612

Case Documents
1   REHEARING
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109742
11 pages
PDF
2   NAPSTER STAY
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109739
33 pages
PDF
3   LESSIG
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109738
49 pages
PDF
4   DEC NICHOLS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109733
5 pages
PDF
5   DEC GUERINOT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109731
4 pages
PDF
6   DEC BARLOW
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109727
6 pages
PDF
7   BRIEF0912
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109726
42 pages
PDF
8   BRIEF0818
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109725
75 pages
PDF
9   AMICUS PHYSICIANS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109723
35 pages
PDF
10   AMICUS LAW1
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109722
19 pages
PDF
11   AMICUS LAW
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109721
19 pages
PDF
15   Government Exhibit # 010305-INJUNCTION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109714
24 pages
PDF
16   Government Exhibit # 010223-PETITION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109712
25 pages
PDF
18 2001-04-03 Government Exhibit # 3RD COMPLIANCE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109717
29 pages
PDF
19 2001-03-20 Government Exhibit # 010320-COMPLIANCE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109716
23 pages
PDF
20 2001-03-12 Government Exhibit # 010312-COMPLIANCE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109715
48 pages
PDF
21 2001-02-12 Government Exhibit # 010301-PROPOSED
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109713
5 pages
PDF
22 2000-07-26 TYGAR
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109744
63 pages
PDF
23 2000-07-26 REQ FOR EVID HEARING
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109743
3 pages
PDF
24 2000-07-26 OPPOSITION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109741
56 pages
PDF
25 2000-07-26 OLIN DECL
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109740
16 pages
PDF
26 2000-07-26 DEC XEAL
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109736
4 pages
PDF
27 2000-07-26 DEC WENDELL
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109735
7 pages
PDF
28 2000-07-26 DEC SIVER
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109734
6 pages
PDF
29 2000-07-26 DEC LAW
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109732
4 pages
PDF
30 2000-07-26 DEC GILBERT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109730
6 pages
PDF
31 2000-07-26 DEC FAN
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109729
8 pages
PDF
32 2000-07-26 DEC CHUCKD
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109728
8 pages
PDF
33 2000-07-26 BARRY DECL
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109724
8 pages
PDF
34 2000-05 HALL REPORT FINAL
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 109737
25 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 34 documents , 677 pages
Price: $ 184.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . REHEARING

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
PLAINTIFFS
INFRINGING
INJUNCTION
EXH
PULGRAM DECL
DISTRICT COURT
PANEL
INTERPRETATION
LIABILITY
PETITION
OPINION
PROVIDERS
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
REHEARING
SONY
AFFIRMING
BURDENS
TECHNOLOGY
JERRY LEIBER
MERITS PANEL
DUTY
COMMERCIALLY SIGNIFICANT NONINFRINGING
DUTIES
SUPPORT
MODIFIED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
DISABLE ACCESS
CONTROL
REASONS
ISP
                                      Appeal Nos. 00-16401 and 00-16403

                              UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                              NINTH CIRCUIT
         ________________________________________________________________
                                       NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,

                                                                                       
                                                     v.
                               A & M RECORDS, INC., a corporation,

                                 (For Full Caption See Following Pages)

                                                                                           
         ________________________________________________________________
                                       NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,

                                                                                       
                                                     v.
                 JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC,

                                 (For Full Caption See Following Pages)

                                                                                           
         ________________________________________________________________
                 Appeal from the U. S. District Court Northern District of California
                            Civil Nos. C 99-5183 MHP (A&M Records) &
                         C 00-0074 MHP (Leiber) Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
         ________________________________________________________________
         NAPSTER, INC.'S SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF
                  PETITION FOR REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC
         ________________________________________________________________

DAVID BOIES                                          LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CSB No. 115163)
JONATHAN SCHILLER                                    DAVID L. HAYES (CSB No. 122894)
ROBERT SILVER                                        FENWICK & WEST LLP
PHILIPPE SELENDY                                     275 Battery Street, Suite 1500
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP                        San Francisco, CA  94111
80 Business Park Drive, Suite 110                    Telephone:          (415) 875-2300
Armonk, New York 10504                               Facsimile:          (415) 281-1350



GARY FRANCIONE                                     DANIEL JOHNSON, JR. (CSB No. 57409)
JESSICA FRIEDMAN                                   DARRYL M. WOO (CSB No. 100513)
SAMUEL KAPLAN                                      JENNIFER M. LLOYD (CSB No. 193416)
HELEN MAHER                                        MARY E. HEUETT (CSB No. 197389)
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP                      EMILIO G. GONZALEZ (CSB No. 197382)
5301 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W., Suite 570             FENWICK & WEST LLP
SNIPPETS:
  • JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC,
  • Appeal from the U. S. District Court Northern District of California
  • PETITION FOR REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC
  • A & M RECORDS, INC., a corporation, GEFFEN RECORDS, INC., a corporation, INTERSCOPE RECORDS, rporation, ELEKTRA ENTERTAINMENT GROUP INC., a corporation, ARISTA RECORDS, INC., a corporation,
  • Napster, Inc. submits this supplemental memorandum in support
  • On February 12, 2001, a merits panel of this Court issued an opinion
  • affirming in part and reversing in part the injunction entered by the
  • proceed with the settlement and entry of the modified preliminary injunction."
  • available on the Napster system before Napster has the duty to disable access to
  • that Napster's system is capable of commercially significant noninfringing uses,
  • Plaintiffs' interpretation, that injunction does not require Plaintiffs to provide any
  • vicarious liability under Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417
  • and a certification of ownership or control of the rights
  • See Pulgram Decl., ¶ 3, Exh.
  • interpretation of the relative allocation of burdens under the Orders,
  • Providers such as Napster; refused to assess Napster's alleged
  • commerce" doctrine set forth in Sony, which limits the duties of technology
  • The imposition of such duties on a technology
  • a qualifying ISP is not
  • In light of these new developments, and for the reasons stated above and in

  • 2 . NAPSTER STAY

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    SONY
    RECORDING
    COURT
    NAPSTER USERS
    PLAINTIFFS
    MOTION
    COPYING
    INJUNCTION
    BUSINESS
    DECL
    TECHNOLOGY
    AMERICA
    PETITIONER/APPELLANT
    CIR
    INFRINGEMENT
    APPELLANT
    RECORDS LABEL
    MP3 FILES
    HARD DRIVES
    NON-INFRINGING
    INFRINGING
    MUSICAL RECORDING
    NAPSTER SYSTEM
    DISTRICT COURT
    SUBSTANTIALITY
    DIAMOND MULTIMEDIA
    GENERAL PARTNERSHIP
    SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT
    MATERIALS
    
    
    
                                                          Appeal No. 00-16401
    
                                         UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                                            NINTH CIRCUIT
    
          ________________________________________________________________________
    
                                                 NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
                                                                                                       
                                                                         v.
                                           A & M RECORDS, INC., a corporation,
    
                                       (For Continuation of Caption See Next Page)
    ______________________________________________________________________________
    
                                                 NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
                                                                                                       
                                                                         v.
                                          JERRY LEIBER, individually and doing
                                             business as JERRY LEIBER MUSIC,
    
                                       (For Continuation of Caption See Next Page)
    
    
    
                                          Appeal from the United States District Court
                                              for the Northern District of California,
                                             San Francisco Division Jointly Heard In
                                   Civil Nos. C 99-5183 MHG (ADR)(A&M Records) and
                                 C 00-0074 MHG (ADR)(Leiber) Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
    
    
                       APPELLANT NAPSTER INC'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR STAY
                       PURSUANT TO RULE 27-3 AND MOTION TO EXPEDITE APPEAL
    
    
    OF COUNSEL:                                                                     LAURENCE F. PULGRAM
    DAVID BOIES                                                                     DAVID L. HAYES (CSB
    BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP                                                   FENWICK & WEST LLP
    80 Business Park Drive, Suite 110                                               275 Battery Street,
    Armonk, New York 10504                                                          San Francisco, CA 
    Telephone: (914) 273-9800                                                       Telephone: (415)
    Facsimile: (914) 273-9810                                                       Facsimile: (415)
    
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • APPELLANT NAPSTER INC'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR STAY
  • PURSUANT TO RULE 27-3 AND MOTION TO EXPEDITE APPEAL
  • SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC., a corporation,
  • ATLANTIC RECORDING CORPORATION, a corporation,
  • BMG MUSIC d/b/a THE RCA RECORDS LABEL, a general partnership,
  • VIRGIN RECORDS AMERICA, INC., a corporation,
  • -and-MIKE STOLLER, individually and doing business as MIKE STOLLER MUSIC,
  • Petitioner/Appellant, Napster, Inc., has no parent corporation, subsidiaries or affiliates
  • The Napster system neither makes, stores, or copies MP3
  • The Napster directory service enables users to identify MP3 files stored on the hard drive
  • Napster technology has been referred to as so revolutionary that it is redefining the
  • contrary to prior decisions in the district, recent statements by this Court (which Plaintiffs
  • The preliminary injunction entered was impermissibly broad in that because
  • Napster is required to block the copying of any music whose copyright is owned by plaintiffs,
  • The effect of the court's injunction is to prevent Napster users from sharing any and all of
  • The District Court summarily denied Napster's request for a stay pending appeal to
  • WITH NON-INFRINGING USE
  • Kodadek v. MTV Networks, Inc., 152 F.3d 1209, 1211 (9th Cir.
  • Napster was engaged in contributory/vicarious infringement because Napster knew that much of
  • as this Court said in RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia
  • allegedly infringing activity of Napster users rather than,
  • Chuck D. Decl ¶¶ 10-13, R687, R689.
  • off limits and acts in peril of contempt if it allows any materials to be shared by any users.
  • The court below erroneously assessed the substantiality of space-shifting,
  • to hold that computer hard drives are "not covered by the AHRA"
  • a "digital musical recording" is defined to exclude a material

  • 3 . LESSIG

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    INTERNET
    COURT
    LAW SCHOOL
    NAPSTER
    TECHNOLOGY
    ARCHITECTURE
    UNITED STATES
    CYBERSPACE
    SUBSTANTIAL NONINFRINGING
    REGULATION
    STANFORD LAW
    EFFECTIVENESS
    CONSTITUTION
    SPEECH
    NETWORK
    CONFERENCE
    CALIFORNIA
    PLAINTIFFS
    COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
    LAW REVIEW
    REGULATING
    SUPREME COURT
    COPYRIGHTED MATERIALS
    DISTRIBUTION
    FREE SPEECH
    PROTECTION
    FACILITATE
    CONTRIBUTORY
    WASHINGTON
    
                             UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
                          NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
                                   SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
    
    
    
    
    
    A&M RECORDS, INC., a corporation, et al.       Case Nos. C 99-5183 MHP (ADR)
    
                    Plaintiffs,                              C 00-0074 MHP (ADR)
    
          v.                                       EXPERT REPORT OF
    
                                                   PROFESSOR LAWRENCE
    NAPSTER, INC., a corporation, and DOES 1
                                                   LESSIG PURSUANT TO
    through 100,
                                                   FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL
                    Defendants.                    PROCEDURE 26(a)(2)(B)
    
    JERRY LEIBER, individually and doing busi-
    
    ness as JERRY LEIBER MUSIC, et al.
    
                    Plaintiffs,
    
          v.
    
    
    NAPSTER, INC.,
    
                    Defendants.
    
    
    
                                  Table of Contents
    
    I.           Introduction ___________________________________ 1
    II.          Qualifications and Scope of Testimony ______________ 1
    III.         Scope of Work _________________________________ 3
    IV.          Summary of the Analysis _________________________ 3
    V.           The Regulation of Cyberspace _____________________ 4
    VI.          The Architecture of the Internet: End-to-End ________ 5
    VII. The Architecture of the Internet: Protocols___________ 6
    VIII. The Internet's Effect Upon Law ___________________ 8
    IX.          Copyright and the Internet_______________________ 12
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • NAPSTER, INC., a corporation, and DOES 1
  • Inc. is alleged to have been contributorily and vicariously liable for copyright infringement
  • I have been asked to report about the nature of the Internet community, and about efforts at
  • I am a professor of law at Stanford Law School.
  • After completing law school, I clerked for Judge Richard Posner of the Seventh Circuit Court
  • In addition to my recent book, Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace, I have written over fifteen
  • The focus of most of this work has been the interplay between technology and law, and on the
  • I have also contributed essays to the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the LA Times,
  • I am currently representing a group of plaintiffs challenging Congress' Sonny Bono Copyright
  • Although I have written software, and have studied network design and technology extensively,
  • My aim in this review has been to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of regulating the
  • And, of particular importance to this case, the architecture or design of cyberspace
  • The regulation of "adult speech" in cyberspace is a familiar example.
  • It would significantly, and unconstitutionally, burden Internet Service Providers, the Court
  • Reno v. ACLU follows a particular method: before enforcing a law regulating speech on the net
  • regulators must decide how best to respond to this change in the effectiveness of a
  • capable of substantial noninfringing uses," id.
  • At the same time that cyberspace presents a threat to copyrighted material, it also offers a
  • This has led many to worry that the architecture of cyberspace will create too much, rather
  • As the Supreme Court has indicated, the question that contributory infringement raises is not
  • Washington & Lee Law Review
  • The Constitution of Code: Limitations on Choice-based Critiques of Cyberspace Regulation
  • Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu European Conference
  • California Panel: Setting Global Technical Standards

  • 4 . DEC NICHOLS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    TTORA
    AWL
    LLP
    
    
    
                                                          1               DAVID BOIES (pro hac vice)
                                                                          BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
                                                          2               80 Business Park Drive, Suite
                                                                          Armonk, New York  10504
                                                          3               Telephone: (914) 273-9800
                                                                          Facsimile: (914) 273-9810
                                                          4               LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CSB No.
                                                          5               DAVID L. HAYES (CSB No.
                                                                          FENWICK & WEST LLP
                                                          6               275 Battery Street, Suite 1500
                                                                          San Francisco, CA  94111
                                                          7               Telephone: (415) 875-2300
                                                                          Facsimile: (415) 281-1350
                                                          8               DANIEL JOHNSON, JR. (CSB No.
                                                          9  DARRYL M. WOO (CSB No. 100513)
                                                                          MARY E. HEUETT (CSB No.
                                                         10  EMILIO G. GONZALEZ (CSB No. 197382)
                                                                          FENWICK & WEST LLP
                                                         11  Two Palo Alto Square
                                                                          Palo Alto, CA 94306
                                                         12  Telephone: (650) 494-0600
                                                                          Facsimile: (650) 494-1417
                                                         13
    LLP                                                                   Attorneys for Defendant
           T AWL
           ES                                                             NAPSTER, INC.
                             T           O               14
                                    A         LT
                                   S                A
    & W Y
                   E O
                 K N ALP
                 IC                                      15                                            
                       W TTORA
    FEN                                                  16                                            
                                                         17                                            
                                                         18  A&M RECORDS, INC., a corporation, et al., 
    R)
                                                                                                       
    DR)
                                                         19                                   
                                                         20                          v.                
                                                                                                       
                                                         21  NAPSTER, INC., a corporation, and DOES 1
                                                                          through 100,                 
    S
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • W TTORA
  • LLP T AWL
  • & W Y E O K N ALP

  • 5 . DEC GUERINOT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    OFFSPRING
    NAPSTER
    CSB
    FANS
    SCHILLER
    EPITAPH
    PLAY
    HIT
    SELLING
    BAND
    TECHNOLOGY
    EXHIBIT
    DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY
    PERFORMANCES
    EXPENSIVE METHODS
    SAMPLING
    PROMOTION
    CASSETTE
    SAMPLERS
    DOWNLOAD MP3S
    WEBSITE
    TRADE
    INTERNET
    SHARING
    TRANSFERRING INFORMATION
    RADIO
    TELEVISION
    MARKET
    FOSTER
    
                                 1   DAVID BOIES (pro hac vice)
                                JONATHAN D. SCHILLER (pro hac vice)
                        2    BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
                                80 Business Park Drive, Suite 110
                        3    Armonk, New York  10504
                                Telephone: (914) 273-9800
                        4    Facsimile: (914) 273-9810
    
                        5                LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CSB No. 115163)
                                DAVID L. HAYES (CSB
                                                                         No. 122894)
    
                        6                FENWICK & WEST LLP
                                275 Battery Street, Suite 1500
    
                        7                San Francisco, CA  94111
                                Telephone: (415) 875-2300
    
                        8                Facsimile: (415) 281-1350
    
                        9  DANIEL JOHNSON, JR. (CSB No. 57409)
                                DARRYL M. WOO (CSB No. 100513)
    
                       10  MARY E. HEUETT (CSB No. 197389)
                                EMILIO G. GONZALEZ (CSB No. 197382)
    
                       11  FENWICK & WEST LLP
                                Two Palo Alto Square
    
                       12  Palo Alto, CA 94306
                                Telephone: (650) 494-0600
    
                       13  Facsimile: (650) 494-1417
    
                       14  Attorneys for Defendant
                                         NAPSTER, INC.
                       15
                                                                           UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                       16
                                                                         NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
                       17
                                                                                  SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
                       18
    
                       19  A&M RECORDS, INC., a corporation, et al.                               Case
                       20                                       Plaintiffs,                            
                                                     v.
                       21                                                                         
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
  • DARRYL M. WOO (CSB No. 100513)
  • 27 NAPSTER, INC., Defendants.
  • therefore these views are exclusively those of the Offspring and Jim
  • 17 Epitaph label, The Offspring released another album, Ignition.
  • "Come Out and Play" and top hit "Self Esteem" helped push their third
  • 19 album, Smash, to the best selling independent album release of all time, selling over
  • 20 Videos from that album received heavy MTV play.
  • In October of 1998, the band released their fifth album,
  • A copy of that web page link is attached as Exhibit A. The Offspring believe that
  • 27 digital technology provides a great opportunity to communicate directly with fans and thus
  • performances by the band.
  • 11 create new fans all over the world.
  • and more expensive methods of
  • 12 "sampling" promotion such as cassette and CD samplers, allowing fans to download MP3s from
  • 14 website and/or trade them on Napster is radically more efficient and effective.
  • 15 increasing use of the Internet, it is conceivable that Napster and other technologies that
  • 16 quick and direct means of sharing and transferring information, will be as effective as
  • 17 television and the press to market and promote their music while being more cost effective.
  • 18 Offspring view Napster as a vital and necessary means to promote music and foster a better

  • 6 . DEC BARLOW

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    ARTISTS
    TECHNOLOGY
    NAPSTER
    ECONOMY
    PUBLICATIONS
    DEMAND
    DISTRIBUTION
    CSB
    CONTRIBUTING
    SCIENCE
    GRATEFUL DEAD
    FANS
    MUSICIANS
    SHARING
    PROMOTION
    LISTENERS
    TRADITIONAL RECORDING COMPANY
    RECORDING COMPANY SYSTEM
    SUCCESSFUL
    ARTIST SIGNING
    RIGHTS
    LABEL
    SUBSTANTIAL LEVEL
    POPULARITY
    COMPENSATION
    INDUSTRY CONTRACTS
    BANKRUPT
    REGARDLESS
    COST
    
    
    
                        1          DAVID BOIES (pro hac vice)
                                   JONATHAN D. SCHILLER (pro hac vice)
                        2          BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
                                   80 Business Park Drive, Suite 110
                        3          Armonk, New York, 10504
                                   Telephone: (914) 273-9800
                        4          Facsimile: (914) 273-9810
                        5          LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CSB No. 115163)
                                   DAVID L. HAYES (CSB No. 122894)
                        6          FENWICK & WEST LLP
                                   275 Battery Street, Suite 1500
                        7          San Francisco, CA  94111
                                   Telephone: (415) 875-2300
                        8          Facsimile: (415) 281-1350
    
                        9  DANIEL JOHNSON, JR. (CSB No. 57409)
                                   DARRYL M. WOO (CSB 100513)
                       10  MARY E. HEUETT (CSB No. 197389)
                                   EMILIO G. GONZALEZ (CSB No. 197382)
                       11  FENWICK & WEST LLP
                                   Two Palo Alto Square
                       12  Palo Alto, CA 94306
                                   Telephone: (650) 494-0600
                       13  Facsimile: (650) 494-1417
    
                       14  Attorneys for Defendant
                                   NAPSTER, INC.
                       15
                                                                 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                       16
                                                               NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
                       17
                                                                         SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
                       18
    
                       19  A&M RECORDS, INC., a corporation, et al.                          Case Nos.
                       20                             Plaintiffs,                                      
                                          v.
                       21                                                                    
                                   NAPSTER, INC., a corporation, and DOES 1
                       22                                                                    BARLOW. IN
                                   through 100,                                              DEFENDANT
                       23                             Defendants.                            OPPOSITION
                                                                                             MOTION FOR
                       24  JERRY LEIBER, individually and doing business                     INJUNCTION
                                   as JERRY LEIBER MUSIC, et al.
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • 10 MARY E. HEUETT (CSB No. 197389)
  • 27 NAPSTER, INC., Defendants.
  • 10 of Independence of Cyberspace" as well as "The Economy of Ideas."
  • I am a contributing editor
  • 11 of numerous publications,
  • I was the first to apply William Gibson's science
  • 16 Network, and Diamond Technology Partners, and am a member of the External Advisory Council
  • 24 Grateful Dead, who allow, and in some cases encourage, their fans to make recordings of
  • These musicians have discovered, as the Grateful Dead did, that the best way
  • 10 by sharing my music with another fan in Los Angeles, Tokyo, or Dublin.
  • 11 sharing our songs with each other for decades, and it did nothing but increase the demand
  • 14 the big five recording companies on marketing, promotion and distribution.
  • 16 millions of listeners ­ without the artist signing away rights and becoming indebted to a
  • 17 label.
  • Under the traditional recording company system, only a small percentage of the world's
  • 19 smaller percentage is given the promotional support necessary to become successful.
  • 20 an artist reaches a substantial level of popularity, the artist's compensation is minimal.
  • 21 industry contracts are such that artists become debt-ridden or go bankrupt, regardless of
  • 24 keeping" and, with little cost, begin the distribution of their own music.
  • 25 provides an even lower technological barrier to artists for online distribution because it

  • 7 . BRIEF0912

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DISTRICT COURT
    PLAINTIFFS
    SONY
    RECORDING
    CIR
    INFRINGING
    EVIDENCE
    CONSUMERS
    TECHNOLOGY
    UNITED STATES
    INFRINGEMENT
    JERRY LEIBER
    GENERAL PARTNERSHIP
    AMICI
    COMPUTER HARD DRIVES
    INJUNCTION
    LIABILITY
    ISPS
    NONINFRINGING
    SPACE-SHIFTING
    DISTRIBUTION
    COMPULSORY ROYALTY
    MATERIALS
    AHRA
    MP3
    DBA JERRY LEIBER
    MCA
    RCA RECORDS
    RECORDS LABEL
    
    
    
                                Appeal Nos. 00-16401 and 00-16403
                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                          NINTH CIRCUIT
    ________________________________________________________________
                                  NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
    
                                                                             Defendant-Appellant,
                                                    v.
                             A & M RECORDS, INC., a corporation,
    
                                  (For Full Caption See Following Pages)
    
                                                                              Plaintiffs-Appellees.
    ________________________________________________________________
                                  NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
    
                                                                             Defendant-Appellant,
                                                    v.
                 JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC,
    
                                  (For Full Caption See Following Pages)
    
                                                                              Plaintiffs-Appellees.
              _____________________________________________________________
                Appeal from the U. S. District Court Northern District of California
                          Civil Nos. C 99-5183 MHP (A&M Records) &
                        C 00-0074 MHP (Leiber) Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
    ________________________________________________________________
                       REPLY BRIEF OF APPELLANT NAPSTER, INC.
    ________________________________________________________________
         DAVID BOIES                               LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CSB No. 115163)
         JONATHAN SCHILLER                         DAVID L. HAYES (CSB No. 122894)
         ROBERT SILVER                             FENWICK & WEST LLP
         BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP             275 Battery Street, Suite 1500
         80 Business Park Drive, Suite 110         San Francisco, CA  94111
         Armonk, New York 10504                    Telephone:      (415) 875-2300
                                                   Facsimile:      (415) 281-1350
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
  • JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC,
  • REPLY BRIEF OF APPELLANT NAPSTER,
  • A & M RECORDS, INC., a corporation, GEFFEN RECORDS, INC., a corporation, INTERSCOPE RECORDS, rporation, ELEKTRA ENTERTAINMENT GROUP INC., a corporation, ARISTA RECORDS, INC., a corporation,
  • E. Severing Infringing from Noninfringing File Sharing Is
  • Its Users Does Not Negate the Sony Doctrine
  • G. Plaintiffs Seek To Inject Irrelevant Intent Evidence Into the
  • THE DISTRICT COURT APPLIED THE INCORRECT LEGAL
  • Contributory Infringement.
  • A COMPULSORY ROYALTY IS AN APPROPRIATE REMEDY.
  • Abend v. MCA, Inc.,
  • F.2d 1465 (9th Cir.
  • Religious Technology Cntr.
  • LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS
  • Copyright Infringement, Enterprise Liability, and the First Amendment," 88 Geo.
  • Plaintiffs' amici say "some
  • PLAINTIFFS SERIOUSLY MISCONSTRUE THE AHRA, WHICH IN FACT IMMUNIZES NAPSTER'S USERS.
  • does not affect an action for illegal distribution as opposed to illegal copying.
  • Amici's argument that the immunity for manufacturers in §1008 would be surplusage if the
  • but whether the recording at issue includes more than music.
  • or computer hard drives are not themselves musical recordings;
  • conclusion that space-shifting in which millions engage is de minimis.
  • 12 Plaintiffs attempt to distinguish Napster from the Rio player in Diamond by noting that
  • because the District Court made no such findings; its injunction cannot
  • ISPs, and this development is consistent with limitations on the general application

  • 8 . BRIEF0818

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    NAPSTER
    RECORDING
    SONY
    PLAINTIFFS
    CIR
    TECHNOLOGY
    LABELS
    COPYING
    INTERNET
    MP3 FILES
    PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
    SUBSTANTIAL NON-INFRINGING
    ARTISTS
    INFRINGEMENT
    CONSUMERS
    ENTERTAINMENT
    JERRY LEIBER
    PEER-TO-PEER
    AHRA
    EVIDENTIARY HEARING
    SPACE-SHIFTING
    GENERAL PARTNERSHIP
    DISTRIBUTION
    JAY REPORT
    DIAMOND MULTIMEDIA
    MP3 FORMAT
    DBA JERRY LEIBER
    MIKE STOLLER
    CONTRIBUTORY
    
                                          Appeal Nos. 00-16401 and 00-16403
    
                                      UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                                    NINTH CIRCUIT
              ________________________________________________________________
                                            NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
    
                                                                                      
                                                              v.
                                       A & M RECORDS, INC., a corporation,
    
                                            (For Full Caption See Following Pages)
    
                                                                                       
              ________________________________________________________________
                                            NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
    
                                                                                      
                                                              v.
                           JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC,
    
                                            (For Full Caption See Following Pages)
    
                                                                                       
                        _____________________________________________________________
                          Appeal from the U. S. District Court Northern District of California
                                    Civil Nos. C 99-5183 MHP (A&M Records) &
                                  C 00-0074 MHP (Leiber) Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
              ________________________________________________________________
                                 APPELLANT NAPSTER, INC.'S OPENING BRIEF
              ________________________________________________________________
                   DAVID BOIES                               LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CSB No. 115163)
                   JONATHAN D. SCHILLER                      DAVID L. HAYES (CSB No. 122894)
                   ROBERT SILVER                             FENWICK & WEST LLP
                   BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP             275 Battery Street, Suite 1500
                   80 Business Park Drive, Suite 110         San Francisco, CA  94111
                   Armonk, New York 10504                    Telephone:      (415) 875-2300
                                                             Facsimile:      (415) 281-1350
    
    
    
    
    
    
                   MICHAEL A. BRILLE                          DANIEL JOHNSON, JR. (CSB No. 57409)
                   EDWARD NORMAND                             DARRYL M. WOO (CSB No. 100513)
                   SAMUEL C. KAPLAN                           DAVID M. LISI (CSB No. 154926)
                   WILLIAM C. JACKSON                         JENNIFER M. LLOYD (CSB No. 193416)
                   SETH A. GOLDBERG                           MARY E. HEUETT (CSB No. 197389)
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC,
  • Appeal from the U. S. District Court Northern District of California
  • JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC, MIKE
  • STOLLER, individually and dba MIKE STOLLER MUSIC, and FRANK
  • Napster's Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing Software..............................9 C.
  • Napster and Denying Napster an Evidentiary Hearing on
  • The District Court's Denial of an Evidentiary Hearing
  • Technology Is Not Capable Of "Substantial Non-Infringing
  • Space-Shifting of Copyrighted Music is a Fair Use
  • The District Court Erred In Concluding That Sony Is Inapplicable Because The Napster
  • F. The District Court Erred in Ignoring the Substantial Evidence Demonstrating That
  • Electronic Music Distribution
  • 166 F.3d 772 (5th Cir.), rehg, en banc, denied, 180 F.3d 267 (5th Cir.
  • Gershwin Publishing Corp. v. Columbia Artists Management,
  • RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia Sys.
  • Alfred C. Yen, Internet Service Provider Liability for Subscriber Copyright Infringement,
  • Even Recording Industry Association of
  • On July 26, 2000, the District Court entered a preliminary injunction.
  • Home Recording Act ("AHRA") only applies to actions brought under the AHRA
  • Whether noncommercial consumer copying permitted under the
  • contributory and vicarious infringement set out in Sony Corp. of America v.
  • Neither CD music files nor the resulting MP3 files contain
  • Plaintiffs do not sell music in MP3 format.
  • files are created by consumers, who copy original CD audio files to their disk
  • Internet record labels routinely sell and provide free
  • adverse affect on the market for the copyrighted work was based on the Jay Report.

  • 9 . AMICUS PHYSICIANS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    COURT
    CIR
    UNITED STATES
    PLAINTIFFS
    INTERNET
    CONGRESS
    BUSINESS
    EAGLE FORUM
    LEGAL DEFENSE FUND
    COMMUNICATIONS
    TRANSACTION COSTS
    WEB SITES
    DIRECTORY SERVICE
    INJUNCTION
    DISTRIBUTION
    EAGLE FORUM EDUCATION
    ASSOCIATIVE RIGHTS
    DISTRICT COURT
    AMERICAN PHYSICIANS
    FIRST AMENDMENT
    JERRY LEIBER
    SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
    MHG
    BALL MEMORIAL HOSP
    TECHNOLOGY
    FACILITATES
    INNOVATION
    REGULATION
    AHRA
    
                                      Appeal No. 00-16401
    
                             In The United States Court of Appeals
                                     For The Ninth Circuit
    
                                NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
                                                             Petitioner/Appellant,
                                                 v.
                     A & M RECORDS, INC., a corporation, et al.
    
                                NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
                                                             Petitioner/Appellant,
                                                 v.
                   JERRY LEIBER, individually and doing business
                               as JERRY LEIBER MUSIC, et al.
    
                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                             for the Northern District of California,
                            San Francisco Division Jointly Heard In
             Civil Nos. C 99-5183 MHG (ADR)(A&M Records) and
            C 00-0074 MHG (ADR)(Leiber) Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
    
                                     Brief for Amici Curiae
                  Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, Inc.
                  and Eagle Forum Education and Legal Defense Fund
    
                           Filed in Support of Appellant Napster, Inc.
                                      Supporting Reversal
       Karen B. Tripp
    1100 Louisiana St., Suite 2690
    Houston, Texas 77002
    Phone: (713) 658-9323
    
    
    
    
                              TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
    
                                           CASES
    
    AT&T Corp. v. City of Portland,
           216 F.3d 871 (9th Cir. 2000)  ........................................14-15
     Ball Memorial Hosp., Inc. v. Mutual Hosp. Ins., Inc.,
           784 F.2d 1325 (7th Cir. 1986) ..........................................23
     Boy Scouts v. Dale,
           120 S. Ct. 2446 (2000) .........................................25, 27, 28
     California Democratic Primary v. Jones,
           120 U.S. 2402 (2000) ...............................................25, 29
     Capital Communications Fed. Credit Union v. Boodrow (In re Boodrow),
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • JERRY LEIBER, individually and doing business
  • Appeal from the United States District Court
  • San Francisco Division Jointly Heard In
  • C 00-0074 MHG Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
  • Filed in Support of Appellant Napster,
  • F.2d 1325 (7th Cir.
  • DSC Communications Corp. v. DGI Techs., Inc.,
  • Interest in the Case, and Source of Authority to File The Association of American Physicians
  • Central to the interests of AAPS are the First Amendment
  • Web sites like Napster merely for referring internet1 users to other
  • The injunction by the court below, if upheld, will likely
  • Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund ("Eagle Forum
  • The term "internet" is, like "television" and "telephone", merely a nontrademarked generic
  • facilitates the non-commercial sharing of music over the internet.
  • Napster innovation, based on advances in the internet, falls within the
  • intention of Congress to keep the internet deregulated.
  • distribution, the resultant reduction in transaction costs promotes more
  • A few special interests, such as plaintiffs, may find their role
  • users' First Amendment associative rights is no justification for infringing
  • Web site out of business.
  • Congress Intended to Shield the Internet from Plaintiffs' Claims and from Regulation
  • Congress Shielded Internet Users from Infringement Claims in the AHRA.
  • every directory service ­ and hence millions of Web sites ­ to the risk that
  • 322 and Ball Memorial Hosp.,

  • 10 . AMICUS LAW1

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DISTRICT COURT
    SCHOOL
    NAPSTER
    TECHNOLOGY
    PEER-TO-PEER FILE SHARING
    JUDGE
    UNITED STATES
    SONY
    INTERNET
    CONTROL
    GEORGIA SCHOOL
    INFRINGEMENT
    FILE SHARING SYSTEMS
    MHP
    SUPPORT
    CONSUMERS
    SEARCH ENGINES
    COPYRIGHT OWNERS
    INJUNCTION
    DISTRIBUTION
    PLAINTIFFS
    INFRINGING
    APPEALS
    JERRY LEIBER
    CALIFORNIA
    MARILYN HALL PATEL
    BUFFALO LAW SCHOOL
    FACILITATES
    UNAUTHORIZED COPYING
    
    
    
                               Appeal Nos. 00-16401 and 00-16403
    
                           UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                       NINTH CIRCUIT
    ________________________________________________________________
                                 NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
    
                                                                   Defendant-Appellant,
                                                v.
                          A & M RECORDS, INC., a corporation, et al.,
    
    
                                                                    Plaintiffs-Appellees.
    ________________________________________________________________
                                 NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
    
                                                                   Defendant-Appellant,
                                                v.
          JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC, et al.,
    
    
                                                                    Plaintiffs-Appellees.
         _____________________________________________________________
            Appeal from the U. S. District Court Northern District of California
                          Civil Nos. C 99-5183 MHP (A&M Records) &
                     C 00-0074 MHP (Leiber) Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
    ________________________________________________________________
              AMENDED BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF COPYRIGHT LAW
                          PROFESSORS IN SUPPORT OF REVERSAL
                CONSORTIUM OF 18 COPYRIGHT LAW PROFESSORS
    
         Professor Jessica Litman
         Wayne State University Law School
         468 West Ferry Mall
         Detroit, MI 48202
         313-577-3930
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Professor Keith Aoki                   Professor Ann Bartow
    University of Oregon School of Law     University of South Carolina
    1515 Agate                             School of Law
    Eugene, OR  97403                      Main & Greene Streets
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
  • JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC, et al.,
  • C 00-0074 MHP Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
  • PROFESSORS IN SUPPORT OF REVERSAL CONSORTIUM OF 18 COPYRIGHT LAW PROFESSORS
  • University of Oregon School of Law University of South Carolina
  • University at Buffalo Law School University of Georgia School of Law
  • University of Oklahoma Law School University of Georgia School Of Law
  • University of California,
  • The District Court Should Not Have Imposed Contributory
  • A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, No. C 99-5183 MHP, slip op.
  • Williams & Wilkins v. United States,
  • Sustaining the Public Good Vision of the Internet: The Politics of Search Engines
  • Amici are deeply concerned with the integrity of copyright law, and with assuring that
  • We are particularly concerned that the District Court's approach to these issues would, if
  • Summary of Argument Napster's peer-to-peer file sharing system is an example of an enormously
  • The district court, concerned about the use of Napster to infringe copyrights in recorded
  • In reaching this result, the district court misread the Supreme Court's decision in Sony
  • United States history has seen the introduction of a variety of new technologies that could
  • it is common ground that Napster is not directly infringing
  • Plaintiffs argued, and the district court held, that an injunction should issue against
  • The decentralized model of peer-to-peer networking poses a significant challenge to sectors
  • Peer-to-peer file sharing systems have significant advantages over conventional web-based
  • The District Court acknowledged the controlling effect of Sony with respect to a claim of
  • Judge Patel nonetheless held the Sony test to be inapplicable because "Napster exercises
  • The "continuing control" exception invented by the judge is not justified by the cases she

  • 11 . AMICUS LAW

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DISTRICT COURT
    SCHOOL
    NAPSTER
    TECHNOLOGY
    PEER-TO-PEER FILE SHARING
    JUDGE
    UNITED STATES
    SONY
    INTERNET
    CONTROL
    GEORGIA SCHOOL
    INFRINGEMENT
    FILE SHARING SYSTEMS
    MHP
    SUPPORT
    CONSUMERS
    SEARCH ENGINES
    COPYRIGHT OWNERS
    INJUNCTION
    DISTRIBUTION
    PLAINTIFFS
    INFRINGING
    APPEALS
    JERRY LEIBER
    CALIFORNIA
    MARILYN HALL PATEL
    BUFFALO LAW SCHOOL
    FACILITATES
    UNAUTHORIZED COPYING
    
    
    
                               Appeal Nos. 00-16401 and 00-16403
    
                           UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                       NINTH CIRCUIT
    ________________________________________________________________
                                 NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
    
                                                                   Defendant-Appellant,
                                                v.
                          A & M RECORDS, INC., a corporation, et al.,
    
    
                                                                    Plaintiffs-Appellees.
    ________________________________________________________________
                                 NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
    
                                                                   Defendant-Appellant,
                                                v.
          JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC, et al.,
    
    
                                                                    Plaintiffs-Appellees.
         _____________________________________________________________
            Appeal from the U. S. District Court Northern District of California
                          Civil Nos. C 99-5183 MHP (A&M Records) &
                     C 00-0074 MHP (Leiber) Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
    ________________________________________________________________
              AMENDED BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF COPYRIGHT LAW
                          PROFESSORS IN SUPPORT OF REVERSAL
                CONSORTIUM OF 18 COPYRIGHT LAW PROFESSORS
    
         Professor Jessica Litman
         Wayne State University Law School
         468 West Ferry Mall
         Detroit, MI 48202
         313-577-3930
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Professor Keith Aoki                   Professor Ann Bartow
    University of Oregon School of Law     University of South Carolina
    1515 Agate                             School of Law
    Eugene, OR  97403                      Main & Greene Streets
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
  • JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC, et al.,
  • C 00-0074 MHP Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
  • PROFESSORS IN SUPPORT OF REVERSAL CONSORTIUM OF 18 COPYRIGHT LAW PROFESSORS
  • University of Oregon School of Law University of South Carolina
  • University at Buffalo Law School University of Georgia School of Law
  • University of Oklahoma Law School University of Georgia School Of Law
  • University of California,
  • The District Court Should Not Have Imposed Contributory
  • A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, No. C 99-5183 MHP, slip op.
  • Williams & Wilkins v. United States,
  • Sustaining the Public Good Vision of the Internet: The Politics of Search Engines
  • Amici are deeply concerned with the integrity of copyright law, and with assuring that
  • We are particularly concerned that the District Court's approach to these issues would, if
  • Summary of Argument Napster's peer-to-peer file sharing system is an example of an enormously
  • The district court, concerned about the use of Napster to infringe copyrights in recorded
  • In reaching this result, the district court misread the Supreme Court's decision in Sony
  • United States history has seen the introduction of a variety of new technologies that could
  • it is common ground that Napster is not directly infringing
  • Plaintiffs argued, and the district court held, that an injunction should issue against
  • The decentralized model of peer-to-peer networking poses a significant challenge to sectors
  • Peer-to-peer file sharing systems have significant advantages over conventional web-based
  • The District Court acknowledged the controlling effect of Sony with respect to a claim of
  • Judge Patel nonetheless held the Sony test to be inapplicable because "Napster exercises
  • The "continuing control" exception invented by the judge is not justified by the cases she

  • 15 . Government Exhibit # 010305-INJUNCTION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    COURT
    NAPSTER
    RECORDINGS
    ORN
    INFRINGING FILES
    TES
    PLAINTIFFS
    NAPSTER SYSTEM
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT
    UNITED STATES
    CALIFORNIA
    MHP
    NORTHERN DISTRICT
    URTURT
    OCC ALIFALIF
    ERNERN
    STA
    REASONABLE KNOWLEDGE
    COPYRIGHTED MUSICAL COMPOSITIONS
    GENERAL PARTNERSHIP
    BUSINESS
    MDL
    JOINT VENTURE
    SOUND RECORDINGS
    DOWNLOADING
    UPLOADING
    TRANSMITTING
    DISTRIBUTING
    ENTERTAINMENT
    
                               1
    
                               2
    
                               3
    
                               4                              UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
                               5                           NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
                               6
    
                               7    A&M RECORDS, INC., a corporation;
    
                                    GEFFEN RECORDS, INC., a corporation;
    
                               8    INTERSCOPE RECORDS, a general                           No. C
    
                                    partnership; SONY MUSIC                                 MDL No. C
    
                               9    ENTERTAINMENT INC., a corporation;
    
                                    MCA RECORDS, INC., a corporation;                       ORDER
    
                              10    ATLANTIC RECORDING CORP., a
    
                                    corporation; ISLAND RECORDS, INC., a
    
                              11    corporation; MOTOWN RECORD
    
                                    COMPANY L.P., a limited partnership;
    
                              12    CAPITOL RECORDS, INC., a corporation;
                                                                                                       
                                    LA FACE RECORDS, a joint venture; BMG
    URTURT                                                                                             
                              13    MUSIC d/b/a THE RCA RECORDS LABEL,
              O                                                                                        
                   OCC alifalif
                                    a general partnership; UNIVERSAL
                                                                                                       
                              14
                                                                                                       
                                    RECORDS INC., a corporation; ELEKTRA
    
                                    ENTERTAINMENT GROUP INC., a
    
                              15    corporation; ARISTA RECORDS, INC., a
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
  • MDL No. C 00-1369 MHP
  • ENTERTAINMENT INC., a corporation;
  • a joint venture; BMG URTURT
  • ISTRICT ISTRICT
  • TES TES
  • STA
  • 23 In accordance with the Opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • 25 pendency of this action and until final judgment is entered, defendant Napster, Inc. and
  • engaging in, or facilitating others in, copying, downloading, uploading, transmitting, or
  • Plaintiffs shall provide notice to Napster of their copyrighted sound recordings by
  • 10 Plaintiffs shall make a substantial effort to identify the infringing files as well as the
  • 14 believe that a file available on the Napster system is a variation of a particular work or
  • The Ninth Circuit held that the burden of ensuring that no copying, downloading,
  • Once Napster "receives reasonable knowledge" from any source identified in preceding
  • Within three business days of receipt of reasonable notice of infringing files,
  • OCC alifalif C
  • Plaintiffs shall provide notice to Napster of their copyrighted musical compositions by
  • MUSIC, a California general partnership,

  • 16 . Government Exhibit # 010223-PETITION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    COURT
    SONY
    RECORDING
    TECHNOLOGY
    PANEL
    DISTRICT COURT
    INJUNCTION
    VICARIOUS LIABILITY
    INFRINGEMENT
    REHEARING
    DMCA
    JERRY LEIBER
    APPEALS
    INFRINGING
    ISPS
    FIRST AMENDMENT
    INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
    AUTHORIZES
    COMPULSORY ROYALTY
    PLAINTIFFS
    CONTRIBUTORY INFRINGEMENT
    DBA JERRY LEIBER
    MARILYN HALL PATEL
    GENERAL PARTNERSHIP
    MCA
    VIRGIN RECORDS AMERICA
    SERVICE PROVIDERS
    SAFE HARBOR
    REQUIRING NAPSTER
    
    
    
                                    Appeal Nos. 00-16401 and 00-16403
    
                                 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                               NINTH CIRCUIT
                ________________________________________________________________
                                      NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
    
                                                                                  Defendant-Appellant,
                                                      v.
                                  A & M RECORDS, INC., a corporation,
    
                                   (For Full Caption See Following Pages)
    
                                                                                   Plaintiffs-Appellees.
                ________________________________________________________________
                                      NAPSTER, INC., a corporation,
    
                                                                                  Defendant-Appellant,
                                                      v.
                     JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC,
    
                                   (For Full Caption See Following Pages)
    
                                                                                   Plaintiffs-Appellees.
                ________________________________________________________________
                     Appeal from the U. S. District Court Northern District of California
                               Civil Nos. C 99-5183 MHP (A&M Records) &
                             C 00-0074 MHP (Leiber) Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
                ________________________________________________________________
                            PETITION OF APPELLANT NAPSTER, INC. FOR
                               REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC
                ________________________________________________________________
    
    
         DAVID BOIES                                 LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CSB No. 115163)
         JONATHAN SCHILLER                           DAVID L. HAYES (CSB No. 122894)
         ROBERT SILVER                               FENWICK & WEST LLP
         PHILIPPE SELENDY                            275 Battery Street, Suite 1500
         BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP               San Francisco, CA  94111
         80 Business Park Drive, Suite 110           Telephone:       (415) 875-2300
         Armonk, New York 10504                      Facsimile:       (415) 281-1350
    
    
    
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • JERRY LEIBER, individually and dba JERRY LEIBER MUSIC,
  • C 00-0074 MHP Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
  • PETITION OF APPELLANT NAPSTER, INC.
  • REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC
  • A & M RECORDS, INC., a corporation, GEFFEN RECORDS, INC., a corporation, INTERSCOPE RECORDS, rporation, ELEKTRA ENTERTAINMENT GROUP INC., a corporation, ARISTA RECORDS, INC., a corporation,
  • The panel held, as it was bound to, that Napster's revolutionary peer-to-peer filesharing
  • injunctive relief conflicts with decisions of the Supreme Court and this Court,
  • eviscerates the protections Congress legislated to protect Internet Service Providers
  • (ISPs), and would obstruct even indisputably lawful uses of Napster's technology
  • required to "monitorits service or affirmatively seekfacts indicating infringing
  • and that any injunction based on copyright infringement must
  • imposes on Napster duties inconsistent with its compliance with the DMCA.
  • Sony Corp. of Am. v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417.
  • Court held that a technology used for direct copyright infringement cannot be the
  • of digital recording technologies, an area that, under the Audio Home Recording
  • constitutes special circumstances warranting a compulsory royalty
  • On July 26, 2000, the district court enjoined Napster from
  • that Plaintiffs must provide notice of copyrighted works and files available on
  • vicarious, and contributory infringement.
  • The panel's decision eviscerates the DMCA's safe harbor in a case of first
  • the panel erred in permitting an injunction requiring Napster to "bear
  • Vicarious Liability In Sony, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of technologies that may be
  • They assert before Judge Patel that the panel's decision authorizes an order
  • The panel held that "First Amendment concerns in copyright are allayed by
  • See Abend v. MCA, Inc., 863 F.2d 1465, 1479 (9th Cir.
  • dissenting) (concurring "in the Court of Appeals' suggestion that an award of.

  • 18 . Government Exhibit # 3RD COMPLIANCE

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    SUPP
    BOOKS
    WALT DISNEY
    POWELL
    RCA/ARIOLA
    CERT
    SWALLOW TURN
    PARTNERSHIP
    MASS
    BASIC BOOKS
    GRAPHICS
    DIRECT INFRINGEMENT
    SEGA
    MAPHIA
    PLAINTIFFS
    SEUSS ENTERPRISES
    PENGUIN BOOKS
    
    
    
                                 1          DAVID BOIES (PRO HAC VICE)
                                            JONATHAN SCHILLER
                                 2          ROBERT SILVER (PRO HAC VICE)
                                            BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
                                 3          80 Business Park Drive, Suite 1500
                                            Armonk, New York  10504
                                 4          Telephone:  (914) 273-9800
                                            Facsimile:  (914) 273-9810
                                 5           LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CSB No. 115163)
                                 6          DAVID L. HAYES (CSB No. 122894)
                                            FENWICK & WEST LLP
                                 7          275 Battery Street, Suite 1500
                                            San Francisco, CA  94111
                                 8          Telephone:  (415) 875-2300
                                            Facsimile:  (415) 281-1350
                                 9           JOSEPH W. COTCHETT, JR. (CSB No. 36324)
                             10             CHARLES E. TILLAGE (CSB No. 177983)
                                            COTCHETT, PITRE & SIMON
                             11             840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200
                                            Burlingame, CA  94010
                             12             Telephone:  (650) 697-6000
                                            Facsimile:  (650) 697-0577
                             13              Attorneys for Defendant
                             14             NAPSTER, INC.
    
                             15                                                UNITED STATES DISTRICT
                             16                                          NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
                             17
    
                             18             IN RE NAPSTER, INC. COPYRIGHT                         Case
                             19             LITIGATION                                           
                             20                                                                  
                                                                                                 
                             21                                                                  
                                                                                                  NOS.
                             22                                                                  
                                                                                                 
                             23                                                                  
                                                                                                 
                             24                                                                  
                             25
    
                             26                                            COMPLIANCE REPORT NUMBER 3
                             27                                                       DATED APRIL 3,
                             28
    FENWICK & WEST L L P                    NAPSTER'S THIRD CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • Each of Walt Disney Co. v. Powell,
  • 1990), RCA/Ariola Int'l, Inc. v
  • Central, Inc., 799 F.2d 1219 (8th Cir.
  • cert.
  • Swallow Turn
  • Partnership, 830 F. Supp.
  • Mass.
  • 1993), and Basic Books, Inc. v. Kinko's Graphics Corp.,
  • 1991), concerns direct infringement.
  • Sega Enters.
  • Ltd. v. MAPHIA,
  • 1995)10-that Plaintiffs carry the burden "to provide
  • In Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. v. Penguin Books USA, Inc., 109 F.3d 1394 (9th Cir.

  • 19 . Government Exhibit # 010320-COMPLIANCE

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    MHP
    LEIBER
    METALLICA
    ANDRE YOUNG
    ARTISTS
    HATE PUNK
    CIR
    SLIP
    DISSEMINATING
    
    
    
                                1           DAVID BOIES (PRO HAC VICE)
                                            JONATHAN SCHILLER
                                2           ROBERT SILVER (PRO HAC VICE)
                                            BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
                                3           80 Business Park Drive, Suite 1500
                                            Armonk, NY  10504
                                4           Telephone:  (914) 273-9800
                                            Facsimile:  (914) 273-9810
                                5           LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CSB No. 115163)
                                6           DAVID L. HAYES (CSB No. 122894)
                                            FENWICK & WEST LLP
                                7           275 Battery Street, Suite 1500
                                            San Francisco, CA  94111
                                8           Telephone:  (415) 875-2300
                                            Facsimile:  (415) 281-1350
                                9           JOSEPH W. COTCHETT, JR. (CSB No. 36324)
                                            CHARLES E. TILLAGE (CSB No. 177983)
                              10            COTCHETT, PITRE & SIMON
                                            840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200
                              11            Burlingame, CA  94010
                                            Telephone:  (650) 697-6000
                              12            Facsimile:  (650) 697-0577
    
                              13            Attorneys for Defendant
                                            NAPSTER, INC.
                              14
    
                              15                                                  UNITED STATES
                              16                                               NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
    
                              17
    
                              18            IN RE NAPSTER, INC. COPYRIGHT                          Case
                                            LITIGATION
                              19                                                                  
                                                                                                  
                              20                                                                  
                                                                                                  
                              21                                                                   NOS.
                                                                                                   2638
                              22                                                                   4068
    
                              23                                                COMPLIANCE REPORT
                              24                                                       DATED MARCH 20,
                              25
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • March 5, 2001, in A&M Records, Inc. et al. v. Napster Inc., Case No. C 99-05183 MHP, Leiber et
  • MHP, Metallica et al. v. Napster, Inc., Case No. C 00-4068 MHP and Andre Young, et al. v
  • Artists - D.O.A. - I hate Punk Rock.mp3."
  • Napster, Inc., (9th Cir.
  • Feb. 12, 2001) Slip.
  • at 49) is further exacerbated by disseminating

  • 20 . Government Exhibit # 010312-COMPLIANCE

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    MHP
    CIR
    SLIP
    LEIBER
    CASANOVA RECORDS
    METALLICA
    ANDRE YOUNG
    
    
    
                                1           ¶DAVID BOIES (PRO HAC VICE)
                                            JONATHAN SCHILLER
                                2           ROBERT SILVER (PRO HAC VICE)
                                            BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
                                3           80 Business Park Drive, Suite 1500
                                            Armonk, NY  10504
                                4           Telephone:  (914) 273-9800
                                            Facsimile:  (914) 273-9810
                                5            LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CSB No. 115163)
                                6           DAVID L. HAYES (CSB No. 122894)
                                            FENWICK & WEST LLP
                                7           275 Battery Street, Suite 1500
                                            San Francisco, CA  94111
                                8           Telephone:  (415) 875-2300
                                            Facsimile:  (415) 281-1350
                                9            JOSEPH W. COTCHETT, JR. (CSB No. 36324)
                             10             CHARLES E. TILLAGE (CSB No. 177983)
                                            COTCHETT, PITRE & SIMON
                             11             840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200
                                            Burlingame, CA  94010
                             12             Telephone:  (650) 697-6000
                                            Facsimile:  (650) 697-0577
                             13
                             14             Attorneys for Defendant
                                            NAPSTER, INC.
                             15
                             16                                                 UNITED STATES DISTRICT
    
                             17                                              NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
    
                             18
                             19             IN RE NAPSTER, INC. COPYRIGHT                          Case
                                            LITIGATION
                             20                                                                   
                                                                                                   OF
                             21                                                                   
                                                                                                  
                             22                                                                    NOS.
                                                                                                  
                             23                                                                   
    
                             24                                                COMPLIANCE REPORT NUMBER
                             25                                                       DATED MARCH 12,
                             26
    
                             27
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • Napster Inc., Case No. C 99-05183 MHP, Leiber et al. v. Napster, Inc., Case No. C 00-
  • MHP, Casanova Records, et al. v. Napster, Inc., C 00-2638 MHP, Metallica et al. v. Napster,
  • Case No. C 00-4068 MHP and Andre Young, et al. v. Napster, Inc., Case No. C 00-3997 MHP,
  • A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., (9th Cir., February 12, 2001) Slip Op.
  • Slip Op.")

  • 21 . Government Exhibit # 010301-PROPOSED

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    NAPSTER
    CIR
    SLIP
    
    
    
                                     1            DAVID BOIES (PRO HAC VICE)
                                                  ROBERT SILVER (PRO HAC VICE)
                                     2            BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
                                                  80 Business Park Drive, Suite 1500
                                     3            Armonk, New York  10504
                                                  Telephone:  (914) 273-9800
                                     4            Facsimile:  (914) 273-9810
    
                                     5            LAURENCE F. PULGRAM (CSB No. 115163)
                                                  DAVID L. HAYES (CSB No. 122894)
                                     6            FENWICK & WEST LLP
                                                  275 Battery Street, Suite 1500
                                     7            San Francisco, CA  94111
                                                  Telephone:  (415) 875-2300
                                     8            Facsimile:  (415) 281-1350
    
                                     9            JOSEPH W. COTCHETT, JR. (CSB No. 36324)
                                                  CHARLES E. TILLAGE (CSB No. 177983)
                                  10              COTCHETT, PETRI & SIMON
                                                  840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200
                                  11              Burlingame, CA  90401
                                                  Telephone:  (650) 697-6000
                                  12              Facsimile:  (650) 697-0577
    
                                  13              Attorneys for Defendant
                                                  NAPSTER, INC.
                                  14
                                  15                                                 UNITED STATES
    
                                  16                                            NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
    
                                  17
                                  18              IN RE NAPSTER, INC. COPYRIGHT                        
                                                  LITIGATION
                                  19                                                                   
                                                                                                       
                                  20
                                  21
    
                                  22                      In accordance with the Opinion of the United
                                  23              Circuit, filed on February 12, 2001, it is, this ____
                                  24              that, during the pendency of these actions and until
                                  25              the Court, Defendant Napster, Inc. and its agents,
                                  26              subsidiaries, and those acting at their direction who
                                  27              "Napster") are enjoined as follows:
                                  28
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • FENWICK & WEST L L P
  • A&M Records v. Napster, Inc., (9th Cir.
  • February 12, 2001) Slip Op.

  • 22 . TYGAR

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    NAPSTER
    AUDIO
    MP3 FILES
    TECHNOLOGY
    COMPRESSION
    WATERMARKING
    RIGHTS
    REPORT
    AUTHORIZATIONS
    MECHANISMS
    MATERIALS
    FILE SHARING
    UNITED STATES
    INTERNET
    CASSETTE
    DISTRIBUTION
    RIAA
    ENGINEERING
    ID/PASSWORD MECHANISMS
    DAT
    SEARCH ENGINES
    CDS
    RECORDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
    PROTECTION
    SDMI
    STATES DISTRICT COURT
    PLAYBACK DEVICE
    SMART MEDIA MEMORY
    LOSSY COMPRESSION
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
                 EXPERT REPORT OF J. D. TYGAR PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF
                                        CIVIL PROCEDURE 26(a)(2)(B)
    
                 A&M RECORDS, INC. ET AL. V. NAPSTER, INC.  CASE NUMBER C 99-5183 MHP (ADR)
                   JERRY LEIBER ET AL. V. NAPSTER, INC.  CASE NUMBER C 00-0074 MHP (ADR)
                        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
                                           (SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION)
    
                       FOR HEARING JULY 26, 2000
    
    
                                                                                                1
    
    
    
    TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    
    
    INTRODUCTION AND
    
    SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
    
    OVERVIEW OF PERTINENT TECHNOLOGY ­ DIGITAL AUDIO AND COMPRESSION........ 10
    
    CONCLUSION 1:  NAPSTER ALLOWS USERS TO SHARE RECORDED MUSIC....................... 15
    
    CONCLUSION 2:  NAPSTER ALLOWS USERS TO SHARE MP3 FILES ....................................... 23
    
    CONCLUSION 3:  NAPSTER DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO INFORMATION ABOUT
    COPYRIGHTS..........................................................................................
     28
    
    CONCLUSION 4:  NAPSTER CAN NOT CHECK AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................... 34
    
    CONCLUSION 5:  AUTHORIZATION WOULD CHANGE THE WEB TO A CENTRALIZED
    UTILITY
    ....... 35
    
    CONCLUSION 6:  WATERMARKING COULD CARRY RIGHTS INFORMATION WITH A
    RECORDING
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • A&M RECORDS, INC. ET AL. V. NAPSTER, INC.
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
  • OF PERTINENT TECHNOLOGY ­ DIGITAL AUDIO AND COMPRESSION
  • NAPSTER CAN NOT CHECK AUTHORIZATIONS
  • ID/PASSWORD MECHANISMS ARE A CUSTOMARY WAY OF ALLOWING
  • I am an expert in software engineering, computer security, and cryptography.
  • for work on mechanisms to address issues of copy protection.
  • Hal Varian (an economics and business professor working in the field of Internet
  • policy mechanisms) to handle rights management issues.
  • I have used a variety of materials in preparing this report from both the
  • As I examine additional materials and perform further analyses,
  • - dual dubbing cassette decks;
  • Napster allows users to exchange and share MP3 files.
  • - search engines;
  • Furthermore, to require Napster, any other search engine, or any file sharing utility to
  • information base to a centrally controlled top-down distribution device.
  • The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and individual record labels
  • Digital recording formats, such as compact discs (CDs), Digital Versatile Disks
  • technology associated with a computer or playback device.
  • Lossy compression can significantly reduce storage requirements that lossless
  • devices using memory sticks, compact flash memory, and smart media memory;
  • Minidiscs and Digital Audio Tape (DAT) provide consumer oriented formats
  • Watermarking could carry rights information with a recording
  • The Recording Industry Association of America and individual record labels

  • 23 . REQ FOR EVID HEARING

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    CSB
    NAPSTER
    DARRYL
    WOO
    EMILIO
    GONZALEZ
    EVIDENTIARY HEARING
    PARTIES
    JOINT SUBMISSION
    
    
    
                        1          DAVID BOIES (pro hac vice)
                                   BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
                        2          80 Business