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

Filing 390

NOTICE by Hotfile Corp., Anton Titov Defendants' Notice of Filing the Publicly Filed Redacted Version of the Declaration of Andrew Leibnitz and Exhibits Thereto, Filed in Support of Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment and Exhibits Thereto (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit 9, # 11 Exhibit 10, # 12 Exhibit 11, # 13 Exhibit 12, # 14 Exhibit 13, # 15 Exhibit 14, # 16 Exhibit 15, # 17 Exhibit 16, # 18 Exhibit 17, # 19 Exhibit 18, # 20 Exhibit 19, # 21 Exhibit 20, # 22 Exhibit 21, # 23 Exhibit 22, # 24 Exhibit 23, # 25 Exhibit 24, # 26 Exhibit 25, # 27 Exhibit 26, # 28 Exhibit 27, # 29 Exhibit 28, # 30 Exhibit 29, # 31 Exhibit 30, # 32 Exhibit 31, # 33 Exhibit 32, # 34 Exhibit 33, # 35 Exhibit 34, # 36 Exhibit 35, # 37 Exhibit 36, # 38 Exhibit 37)(Munn, Janet)

Download PDF
EXHIBIT 25 Page 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC., TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION, UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS PRODUCTIONS LLLP, COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC., and WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC., Plaintiffs, CASE NO. 11-20427-WILLIAMS-TURNOFF vs. HOTFILE CORP., ANTON TITOV, and DOES 1-10, Defendants. _________________________ AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION. _______________________________________________________ HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF MICHAEL BENTKOVER Los Angeles, California Tuesday, December 13, 2011 Reported by: LORI SCINTA, RPR CSR No. 4811 Job No. 177476A Page 2 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 3 4 7 DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC., TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION, UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS PRODUCTIONS LLLP, COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC., and WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC., 8 Plaintiffs, 5 6 9 10 vs. CASE NO. 11-20427-WILLIAMS-TURNOFF HOTFILE CORP., ANTON TITOV, and DOES 1-10, 11 12 13 Defendants. _________________________ AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION. _______________________________________________________ 14 15 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER 16 Videotaped deposition of MICHAEL BENTKOVER, 17 taken on behalf of Defendants and Counterclaimant 18 at 633 West Fifth Street, Suite 3600, Los Angeles, 19 California, beginning at 9:38 A.M. and ending at 20 12:17 P.M. on Tuesday, December 13, 2011, before 21 LORI SCINTA, RPR, Certified Shorthand Reporter No. 22 4811. 23 24 25 Page 3 1 APPEARANCES: 2 3 For Plaintiffs: 4 5 6 7 JENNER & BLOCK LLP BY: STEVEN B. FABRIZIO Attorney at Law 1099 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 900 Washington, D.C. 20001-4412 202.639.6000 Email: sfabrizio@jenner.com 8 9 For Defendants and Counterclaimant: 10 11 12 13 14 FARELLA BRAUN + MARTEL LLP BY: EVAN M. ENGSTROM Attorney at Law 235 Montgomery Street San Francisco, California 94104 415.954.4400 Email: eengstrom@fbm.com 15 16 Videographer: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 VONYARN MASON SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 20 Corporate Park, Suite 350 Irvine, California 92606 877.955.3855 Page 31 1 Q Did you have any other communications with 2 Hotfile between this top-level email dated April -- 3 August 26th, 2009, and the April 30th, 2009, regarding 4 the possibility of establishing a takedown tool? 5 MR. FABRIZIO: Objection. 6 THE WITNESS: I don't know. 7 8 9 10 BY MR. ENGSTROM: Q 15 Did you ever communicate with Hotfile tools for removing content from Hotfile? MR. FABRIZIO: Objection. Vague and lacks foundation. 13 14 Okay. about implementing any other policies or strategies or 11 12 Overbroad. THE WITNESS: Repeat the question. BY MR. ENGSTROM: Q Did you ever communicate with Hotfile about 16 establishing any other tools, policies, measures, 17 basically within the realm of the idea of an SRA, any 18 other techniques, tools, implementations -- 19 A No, I did not. 20 Q -- that -- 21 MR. FABRIZIO: 22 Objection. Excuse me. Vague, compound and lacks 23 foundation and also vague as to timeframe. 24 BY MR. ENGSTROM: 25 Q At any time. Page 44 1 MR. FABRIZIO: 2 THE WITNESS: Objection to form. It was the only option we had. 3 Do I think it was the most effective? 4 BY MR. ENGSTROM: 5 6 Q What do you believe would have been a more effective option? 7 8 No. MR. FABRIZIO: Objection. Calls for speculation and opinion. 9 THE WITNESS: Hotfile could have prefiltered 10 and not allowed the files in the first place. 11 BY MR. ENGSTROM: 12 Q Did you communicate to Hotfile about 13 implementing such prefiltering? 14 MR. FABRIZIO: 15 THE WITNESS: 16 17 Objection. Vague. No. BY MR. ENGSTROM: Q Did anyone you're aware of -- are you aware of 18 anyone at Warner Bros. that communicated to Hotfile 19 about implementing prefiltering? 20 MR. FABRIZIO: 21 24 25 Vague as to timeframe. 22 23 Objection. THE WITNESS: I don't know. BY MR. ENGSTROM: Q The last sentence of this email reads, "We appreciate the Hotfile takedown removal tool and the Page 112 1 2 3 4 I, the undersigned, a Certified Shorthand Reporter of the State of California, do hereby certify: That the foregoing proceedings were taken 5 before me at the time and place herein set forth; that 6 any witnesses in the foregoing proceedings, prior to 7 testifying, were duly sworn; that a record of the 8 proceedings was made by me using machine shorthand 9 which was thereafter transcribed under my direction; 10 that the foregoing transcript is a true record of the 11 testimony given. 12 Further, that if the foregoing pertains to 13 the original transcript of a deposition in a Federal 14 Case, before completion of the proceedings, review of 15 the transcript [ x ] was [ ] was not requested. 16 I further certify I am neither financially 17 interested in the action nor a relative or employee 18 of any attorney or party to this action. 19 20 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have this date subscribed my name. 21 22 Dated: 12-15-11 23 24 25 ________________________________ LORI SCINTA, RPR CSR No. 4811

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?