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

Filing 409

REPLY to Response to Motion re 301 MOTION for Summary Judgment >WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION (PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION)< >WARNER'S REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF WARNER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION)< filed by Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Reply Declaration of Jennifer V. Yeh in Support of Warner's Motion for Summary Judgment (public redacted version), # 2 Exhibit R to Declaration of Jennifer V. Yeh, # 3 Exhibit S to Declaration of Jennifer Yeh, # 4 Exhibit T to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 5 Exhibit U to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 6 Exhibit V to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 7 Exhibit W to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 8 Exhibit X to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 9 Affidavit Reply Declaration of Dr. Ian Foster in Support of Warner's Motion for Summary Judgment (public redacted version))(Stetson, Karen)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 11-20427-WILLIAMS/TURNOFF
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.

/

HOTFILE CORP.,
Counterclaimant,
v.
WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC.,
Counterdefendant.

/

REPLY DECLARATION OF DR. IAN FOSTER IN SUPPORT OF WARNER’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION

I, Ian Foster, hereby declare as follows:
1.

My name is Ian Foster and I currently hold the position of Director of the

Computation Institute at Argonne National Laboratory and the University of Chicago. My
expert qualifications and background, as well as the materials I have reviewed in performing my
analysis in this case, have previously been summarized in the declaration I submitted in support
of Warner’s Motion for Summary Judgment. In the interests of avoiding repetition, I refer the
Court to my February 10, 2011 declaration for a discussion of my qualifications and a
description of the Hotfile data sets I consulted for purposes of my analysis in this matter.
2.

I have been asked by Plaintiffs to explain what Hotfile’s produced data shows

regarding certain specific claims made by Hotfile and Anton Titov regarding specific users that
they claim Hotfile suspended due to Warner’s takedown notices listed in the counterclaim, in
particular with respect to three users, namely those with userids
JDownloader software),
3.

, and

(the owner of the

My analysis and conclusions are explained below.

According to Hotfile’s “actiondat” data set (which logs user suspensions and

other events), user number
However, Hotfile’s data also shows that any interruption in access to files uploaded by that user
was very short. Hotfile’s “dailydownloads” data set shows that the user’s files were being
downloaded from Hotfile again by

Hotfile’s “affpay” data set (which

logs payments to affiliates) also shows that user

continued to receive uninterrupted

payments through
4.

As for user number

Hotfile’s actiondat data set shows that Hotfile

suspended this user
5.

With respect to user

, I previously supplied to Plaintiffs’ expert Scott

Zebrak information extracted from Hotfile’s data sets showing any days on which Hotfile
received notices for the user’s files, which I understand is represented in his Exhibit B.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed in the State of Illinois this 11th day of March, 2012.

______________________________
Ian Foster, PhD
1