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

Filing 450

RESPONSE in Opposition re 371 MOTION to Strike Defendants' Motion and Memorandum of Law to Strike the Declaration of Jennifer V. Yeh Filed in Support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendant Anton Titov's Motion for Summary Judgment and to Defendant Hotfile Corp. >PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS HOTFILE CORPORATION AND ANTON TITOV'S SECOND MOTION TO STRIKE THE DECLARATION OF JENNIFER V. YEH (PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION)< filed by Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc., Disney Enterprises, Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Universal City Studios Productions LLLP, Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Declaration of Jennifer V. Yeh in Support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendants' Second Motion to Strike the Declaration of Jennifer V. Yeh (Public Redacted Version), # 2 Exhibit A to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 3 Exhibit B to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 4 Exhibit C to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 5 Exhibit D to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 6 Exhibit E to declaration of J. Yeh, # 7 Exhibit F to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 8 Exhibit G to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 9 Exhibit H to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 10 Exhibit I to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 11 Exhibit J to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 12 Exhibit K to Declaration of J. Yeh, # 13 Exhibit L to Declaration of J. Yeh)(Stetson, Karen)

Download PDF
EXHIBIT C 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. _______________________________________________________ CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF DAVID P. KAPLAN, ESQUIRE PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE 30(b)(6) Los Angeles, California Tuesday, December 13, 2011 Volume 1 Reported by: LORI SCINTA, RPR CSR No. 4811 Job No. 177476B DAVID P. KAPLAN, ESQ. CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 12/13/2011 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 16 CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER Videotaped deposition of DAVID P. KAPLAN, 17 ESQUIRE, Volume 1, pursuant to Federal Rule 30(b)(6), 18 taken on behalf of Defendants and Counterclaimant, 19 at 633 West Fifth Street, Los Angeles, California, 20 beginning at 2:18 P.M. and ending at 4:58 P.M. on 21 Tuesday, December 13, 2011, before LORI SCINTA, RPR, 22 Certified Shorthand Reporter No. 4811. 23 24 25 2 DAVID P. KAPLAN, ESQ. CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER 1 12/13/2011 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 VONYARN MASON SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 20 Corporate Park, Suite 350 Irvine, California 92606 877.955.3855 21 22 23 24 25 3 DAVID P. KAPLAN, ESQ. CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER 12/13/2011 02:32 1 infringes Warner Bros. Entertainment, 02:32 2 Inc. rights, rather than sending an 02:32 3 official takedown abuse notice every 02:32 4 time URL's are identified." 02:32 5 At this time, in April of 2009, how was Warner 02:32 6 notifying Hotfile of material that Warner contended was 02:33 7 infringing its copyrights on Hotfile? 02:33 8 02:33 9 02:33 10 by sending an email to an address that was I think 02:33 11 abuse@hotfile.com, or something like that. 02:33 12 02:33 13 know where to send takedown notices to have files 02:33 14 removed from Hotfile? 02:33 15 MR. FABRIZIO: 02:33 16 THE WITNESS: 02:33 17 know -- we didn't have a name or a real address or a 02:33 18 phone number. 02:33 19 BY MR. ENGSTROM: 02:33 20 Q 02:33 21 to Hotfile? 02:33 22 A 02:34 23 02:34 24 02:34 25 A I believe we were sending an email to -- well, electronically -- we were notifying them electronically Q Okay. Did you -- did Warner at any time not Objection. Vague. Well, we didn't -- we didn't All we had was a -- that abuse address. Was Warner ever unable to send takedown notices I'm not sure I understand what you mean. We were able to send notices to that abuse address. Q Okay. My question is: Was there ever a time 16 DAVID P. KAPLAN, ESQ. CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER 12/13/2011 02:40 1 02:40 2 02:40 3 takedown tool which I'll refer to, alternately, as a 02:40 4 special rightsholder account, or an SRA -- 02:40 5 02:40 6 02:40 7 A I do. 02:40 8 Q Okay. 02:40 9 02:40 10 ever ask Hotfile to implement any policy or tool or 02:40 11 practice that would limit the infringing material on 02:40 12 Hotfile? 02:40 13 02:41 14 02:41 15 02:41 16 that exist between Warner's and Hotfile are in the 02:41 17 handful of emails to this -- substantively to the abuse 02:41 18 address. 02:41 19 02:41 20 takedown notices. 02:41 21 BY MR. ENGSTROM: 02:41 22 02:41 23 communications asked Hotfile to implement any policy, 02:41 24 technique or process to curb infringement on Hotfile 02:41 25 other than the implementation of an SRA account? the point that we're talking about here. Q Okay. Other than asking for this rapid Do you understand what I'm referring to if I say those terms? Other than asking Warner Bros. -- or other than asking Hotfile for an SRA, did Warner Bros. MR. FABRIZIO: Objection. Vague as to time and compound. THE WITNESS: Again, the only communications The other communications would all be strictly Q Does Warner contend that any of those 22 DAVID P. KAPLAN, ESQ. CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER 12/13/2011 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 106

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?