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

Filing 449

NOTICE by Hotfile Corp., Anton Titov Defendants' Notice of Filing the Publicly Filed Version of the Declaration of Andrew Leibnitz and Exhibits Thereto Filed In Support of Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike Portions of Boyle, Cromarty and Titov Declaration (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)(Munn, Janet)

Exhibit 14

Page 204
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 11-20427-WILLIAMS

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.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Continued Deposition of JAMES BOYLE
Volume II
(Taken by the Plaintiffs)
Raleigh, North Carolina
January 19, 2012

Reported by:

Marisa Munoz-Vourakis RMR, CRR and Notary Public

TSG Job # 45588
TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Page 205
1

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL:

2

For the Plaintiffs:

3

DUANE POZZA, ESQ.

4

Jenner & Block

5

1099 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 900

6

Washington, DC 20001

7
8
9
10

For the Defendants:

11

DEEPAK GUPTA, ESQ.

12

Farella Braun & Martel

13

Russ Building

14

235 Montgomery Street, 17th Floor

15

San Francisco, CA 94104

16
17
18

o0o

19
20

Continued Deposition of JAMES BOYLE,

21

taken by the Plaintiffs, at Office Suites Plus, 3737

22

Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100, Raleigh, North Carolina, on

23

the 19th day of January, 2012 at 9:38 a.m., before

24

Marisa Munoz-Vourakis, Registered Merit Reporter,

25

Certified Realtime Reporter and Notary Public.
TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Page 447
1

have problems with extrapolating the study, but this,

2

for the purposes of argument, I took their

3

classifications and accepted them.

4

Q.

Well, no, these numbers themselves you're

5

taking a different variable, the paid for variable,

6

right?

They didn't analyze that?

7

A.

That is correct.

8

Q.

And you're saying that you can take that

9

variable, calculate this conversion rate, which is

10

based on this other variable daily download total that

11

they did not consider?

12

A.

I believe they did consider.

13

Q.

Daily download total?

14

A.

Well, they looked at daily downloads,

15

excuse me.

16

MR. GUPTA:

Objection, this line of

17

questioning is obviously somewhat confusing

18

and complicated.

19
20

BY MR. POZZA:
Q.

I'm trying to figure out if these

21

conversion rates that you claim for different

22

categories of infringing and noninfringing content, are

23

you claiming that those conversion rates would

24

extrapolate to the entire population of files or

25

downloads on Hotfile?
TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Page 448
1
2
3

MR. GUPTA:

Objection, to the extent

it seeks a statistical analysis.
A.

What I'm claiming is that if Dr. Waterman

4

and Mr. Zebrak were correct about, first of all, the

5

statistical representativeness of their study, about

6

which I raise questions, and also the accuracy of it,

7

about which I raise questions, but if we assume that

8

for the sake of argument they are claiming that it

9

provides a generalizable representative picture of

10

Hotfile, if they take their assumption, the assumption

11

they make in their report, then I would expect that the

12

paid for could be extrapolated to the rest of Hotfile.

13
14
15

Q.

Would it be extrapolated in the way that

you have done here?
A.

I think a court might extrapolate it in any

16

number of ways.

17

and they are presenting estoppel from which conclusions

18

can be extrapolated, then their sample and their

19

classifications with this one extra piece of

20

information, namely, the sample paid for is a

21

percentage of daily download totals.

22
23
24
25

Q.

I think if their argument is correct,

Is that based on your understanding of the

statistical methods that Dr. Waterman employed?
A.

It's based on my understanding that

Dr. Waterman claims that his study is a statistically
TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Page 462
1
2
3
4
5

SIGNATURE PAGE
you.
(Whereupon the deposition was
concluded at 5:43 p.m.)
(Signature reserved.)

6
7

___________________________

8

JAMES BOYLE

9
10
11

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ______

12

day of_____________________________, 2012

13
14
15
16

___________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC

17
18

My Commission expires:__________________________

19
20
21
22
23
24
25

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Page 464
1
2

C E R T I F I C A T E
I, Marisa Munoz-Vourakis, RMR, CRR and Notary Public,

3

the officer before whom the foregoing proceeding was

4

conducted, do hereby certify that the witness(es) whose

5

testimony appears in the foregoing proceeding were duly

6

sworn by me; that the testimony of said witness(es) were

7

taken by me to the best of my ability and thereafter

8

transcribed under my supervision; and that the foregoing

9

pages, inclusive, constitute a true and accurate

10
11

transcription of the testimony of the witness(es).
I do further certify that I am neither counsel for,

12

related to, nor employed by any of the parties to this

13

action in which this proceeding was conducted, and

14

further, that I am not a relative or employee of any

15

attorney or counsel employed by the parties thereof, nor

16

financially or otherwise interested in the outcome of the

17

action.

18

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name

19

this 23rd of January, 2012.

20
21
22
23

___________________________
MARISA MUNOZ-VOURAKIS
Notary #20032900127

24
25
TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580