Perfect 10 Inc v. Google Inc et al

Filing 350

STATUS REPORT of Perfect 10's Court Ordered List Re (1) Pending Discovery Motions, (2) Discovery Motions That Are Currently Contemplated and (3) Discovery Disputes That Are Reasonably Likely to Arise Within The Next Nine Months filed by Plaintiff Perfect 10 Inc. (Mausner, Jeffrey)

Perfect 10 Inc v. Google Inc et al

Doc. 350

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

JEFFREY N. MAUSNER (State Bar No. 122385) Law Offices of Jeffrey N. Mausner Warner Center Towers, Suite 910 21800 Oxnard Street Woodland Hills, California 91367-3640 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff PERFECT 10, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PERFECT 10, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE INC., a corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendant(s).

Case No. CV 04-9484 [Consolidated with Case No. CV 05-4753 AHM (SHx)] PERFECT 10'S COURT ORDERED LIST RE (1) PENDING DISCOVERY MOTIONS, (2) DISCOVERY MOTIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY CONTEMPLATED AND (3) DISCOVERY DISPUTES THAT ARE REASONABLY LIKELY TO ARISE WITHIN THE NEXT NINE MONTHS Hon. Howard A. Matz Courtroom: 14 Hon. Stephen J. Hillman Courtroom: 550 Discovery Cutoff: None Set Pretrial Conference Date: None Set Trial Date: None Set

AND CONSOLIDATED CASES

Perfect 10's Report Re Discovery Motions in the Google Case
Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

PERFECT 10'S REPORT REGARDING DISCOVERY MOTIONS IN THE GOOGLE CASE Perfect 10 respectfully submits the following summary of pending, contemplated, and likely discovery motions, ordered by the Court on August 20. 1. 2. PENDING DISCOVERY MOTIONS: None filed by Perfect 10. DISCOVERY MOTIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY

CONTEMPLATED: At this time, Perfect 10 does not intend to file any discovery motions. Perfect 10 has determined that discovery motions against Google have been largely futile, because Google has simply disobeyed Court orders, most recently, this Court's important May 13, 2008 discovery order. For that reason, Perfect 10 is not currently planning on filing any further discovery motions at this time. At trial, or when Perfect 10 files its anticipated motions for summary judgment, Perfect 10 may seek to preclude Google from introducing evidence regarding the defenses that Google would not provide discovery on, and possibly other matters. 3. DISCOVERY DISPUTES THAT ARE REASONABLY LIKELY TO Perfect 10 believes that Google and Amazon have attempted to wrongly characterize Perfect 10 as not providing full discovery, when Perfect 10 has produced virtually every document it has (including its tax returns), in an attempt to avoid unnecessary discovery motions. Because defendants cannot file motions based on Perfect 10's lack of production (it has already produced nearly 600 Gigabytes of documents), defendants now are attempting to claim that Perfect 10's form of production was improper, or that Perfect 10 should be ordered to convert its massive production into a different format, TIFF. Perfect 10 believes that Adobe PDF productions are clearly superior to TIFF, as Adobe files are text searchable, have Adobe generated page numbers based on the order in which the pages were created, and maintain the link structure between those ARISE WITHIN THE NEXT NINE MONTHS

1 Perfect 10's Report Re Discovery Motions in the Google Case

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

pages1. Converting an Adobe document to a TIFF document simply separates the Adobe document into separate pages and removes the link structure and page numbers in the original document, thereby removing critical information. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 34(b)(2)(E), in section (i), specifically states that "A party must produce documents as they are kept in the usual course of business or must organize and label them to correspond to the categories in the request." Perfect 10 produced its documents "as they are kept in the usual course of business," in electronic format, in logically arranged files, sub-files, etc. FRCP 34(b)(2)(E)(iii) specifically provides that: "A party need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one form." Defendants are also attempting to use Perfect 10's complete production against it, by seeking to compel Perfect 10 to answer interrogatories which require that Perfect 10 go through its 2,000,000 plus page production, and make a spreadsheet with millions of entries detailing every infringement on every webpage. 4. PERFECT 10 IS WORKING ON REDUCING THE LIKELIHOOD OF Perfect 10 understands that it needs to prove its case, and is working on a copyright registration/image spreadsheet that will provide, for each of Perfect 10's approximately 30,000 copyrighted images, the earliest registration covering that image (not all registrations as defendants seek, and not all 1.2 million infringed copies as defendants seek). Perfect 10 is also working on providing, for a representative collection of infringing websites, an excel spreadsheet listing the number of infringed images per model, as well as one, or possibly more, DMCA notices covering those images (not all 3000+ infringing websites, and not all 100 DMCA notices, as defendants seek). Perfect 10 is hopeful that the excel spreadsheets There may be a few situations where the conversion was performed using a different version of Adobe where this is not the case, but it is the case for the vast preponderance of documents produced by Perfect 10.
2 Perfect 10's Report Re Discovery Motions in the Google Case
1

FUTURE MOTIONS BY DEFENDANTS