Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. Hotfile Corp. et al

Filing 104

Plaintiff's MOTION for Protective Order PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS' ANTIPIRACY INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES by Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc., Disney Enterprises, Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Universal City Studios Productions LLLP, Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Stetson, Karen)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 11-20427-JORDAN

DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC.,
TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION,
UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS PRODUCTIONS LLLP,
COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC., and
WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
HOTFILE CORP., ANTON TITOV, and
DOES 1-10.
Defendants.
/

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’
ANTIPIRACY INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) and Southern District of Florida Local
Rule 26.1(h)(3), Plaintiffs hereby move for a protective order protecting from discovery in this
Action certain highly sensitive information pertaining to their strategies and processes for
investigating and responding to infringement of their copyrighted works online, including on the
Defendants’ Hotfile website.
For the reasons explained in the accompanying Memorandum of Law, the steps that the
Plaintiffs take to detect and respond to infringement of their copyrighted content by Defendants
and by others on the Internet are irrelevant to Defendants’ culpability for copyright infringement.
In addition, the information that Defendants are seeking is extremely sensitive, and improper use
or disclosure thereof could severely prejudice the ability of the Plaintiffs to effectively protect

their content online. Therefore, even if there were any marginal relevance to the information
Defendants are seeking, its probative value would be eclipsed by the potential prejudice of such
discovery to Plaintiffs.
Normally, Plaintiffs would simply interpose objections to Defendants’ discovery
requests, and have done so insofar as Defendants have sought discovery about Plaintiffs’
antipiracy strategies and processes from Plaintiffs directly. However, the need for this motion
arises because the Defendants have turned to also subpoenaing the records of several antipiracy
vendors that carry out the Plaintiffs’ investigations and responses to online content theft on
Plaintiffs behalf, and Plaintiffs believe are therefore in possession of documents reflecting
sensitive and confidential information about Plaintiffs’ strategies and practices in this area.1
WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum of Law,
Plaintiffs move the Court to enter an order protecting from discovery in this Action the specific
categories of information about Plaintiffs’ antipiracy strategies and processes identified and
described in the Memorandum. These categories primarily arise with respect to information
Defendants have sought to subpoena from third parties that act on Plaintiffs’ behalf, however
Plaintiffs respectfully request the Court clarify that any protection extends to any efforts by
Defendants to seek the same information through other requests.2 A proposed order granting the
requested relief has been filed herewith.

1

At the July 8, 2011 status conference, the Court instructed the parties to file by July 22, 2011
any discovery motions that were delayed as a result of the Court’s June 27, 2011 order denying
without prejudice the parties’ joint motion to extend to sixty days the time for bringing motions
to compel or motions for a protective order. Therefore, Plaintiffs are filing this motion today per
the Court’s instructions.
2

Plaintiffs have itemized for the Court in the accompanying Memorandum each of Defendants’
specific discovery requests, both to third parties and Plaintiffs, that overlap with the protection
Plaintiffs are seeking.
2

CERTIFICATE OF GOOD FAITH CONFERENCE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(a)(3), U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Florida, counsel for plaintiffs have conferred with counsel for defendants
Hotfile Corp. and Anton Titov in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this Motion,
but have been unable to do so, as described in the accompanying Declaration of Luke C. Platzer.

Dated: July 22, 2011

Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ Karen L. Stetson_
Karen L. Stetson
GRAY-ROBINSON, P.A.
1221 Brickell Avenue
16th Floor
Miami, Fl 33131
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION
OF AMERICA, INC.
Karen R. Thorland (Pro Hac Vice)
15301 Ventura Blvd.
Building E
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

JENNER & BLOCK LLP
Steven B. Fabrizio (Pro Hac Vice)
Duane C. Pozza (Pro Hac Vice)
Luke C. Platzer (Pro Hac Vice)
1099 New York Ave., N.W.
Suite 900
Washington, DC 20001
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 22d Day of July, 2011, I served the following
documents on all counsel of record on the attached service list via the Court’s CM/ECF filing
system:
Plaintiffs’ Motion For a Protective Order Regarding Plaintiffs’ Antipiracy
Investigations and Enforcement Procedures
I further certify that I am admitted to the United States Court for the Southern District of Florida
and certify that this certificate of Service was executed on this date at Miami, FL.
By: /s/ Karen L. Stetson
Karen L. Stetson

4

SERVICE LIST
Disney Enterprises, Inc., et al. v. Hotfile Corp. et al.
CASE NO. 11-CIV-20427-JORDAN

RASCO KLOCK
Janet T. Munn
[e-mail]
283 Catalonia Ave., Suite 200
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

FARELLA BRAUN + MARTEL LLP
Anthony P. Schoenberg
[e-mail]
Roderick M. Thompson
[e-mail]
N. Andrew Leibnitz
[e-mail]
Deepak Gupta
[e-mail]
Janel Thamkul
[e-mail]
235 Montgomery Street
San Francisco, CA 94104
Phone: [phone]

Attorney for Defendants Hotfile Corp. and
Anton Titov

Attorneys for Defendants Hotfile Corp. and
Anton Titov

BOSTON LAW GROUP, PC
Valentin Gurvits
[e-mail]
825 Beacon Street, Suite 20
Newton Centre, MA 02459
Phone: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants Hotfile Corp. and
Anton Titov

5