Cambridge University Press et al v. Patton et al

Filing 290

RESPONSE in Opposition re 274 MOTION in Limine To Preclude the Admission of Recently Created Fair Use Checklists filed by J. L. Albert, Mark P. Becker, Kenneth R. Bernard, Jr, Larry R. Ellis, Rutledge A. Griffin, Jr, Robert F. Hatcher, C. Thomas Hopkins, Jr, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr, James R. Jolly, Donald M. Leebern, Jr, William NeSmith, Jr, Risa Palm, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Willis J. Potts, Jr, Neil L. Pruitt, Jr, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Nancy Seamans, Kessel Stelling, Jr, Benjamin J. Tarbutton, III, Richard L. Tucker, Larry Walker, Philip A. Wilheit, Sr. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Bates, Mary)

Ann C. Kruger, Ph.D.

April 22, 2011
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY
PRESS, OXFORD UNIVERSITY
PRESS, INC., and SAGE
PUBLICATIONS, INC.,
Plaintiffs,

CIVIL ACTION FILE
NO. 1:08-CV-1425-ODE

vs.
MARK P. BECKER, in his
official capacity as
Georgia State University
President, et al.,
Defendants.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

VIDEOTAPE DEPOSITION OF
ANN CALE KRUGER, Ph.D.

April 22, 2011
2:56 p.m.

Conference Room 16-K
1180 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia
S. Julie Friedman, CCR-B-1476

Ann C. Kruger, Ph.D.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
On behalf of the Plaintiffs:
WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES
JONATHAN BLOOM, ESQ.
767 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10153
212.310.8775
212.310.8007 Fax
[e-mail]
On behalf of the Defendants:
KING & SPALDING LLP
NATASHA HORNE MOFFITT, ESQ.
1180 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3521
404.572.2783
404.572.5134 Fax
[e-mail]

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

April 22, 2011
2

Also Present:
Henry Stewart, Videographer

Ann C. Kruger, Ph.D.

April 22, 2011
23

1
2

Q.

The date on this particular checklist,

Kruger TX-2, is fall 2009.

Do you see that?

3

A.

I do.

4

Q.

Did you complete a version of this

5

checklist in the fall of 2009?

6

A.

I did.

7

Q.

With respect to the specific copy, Kruger

8

TX-2, dated fall 2009, is this a copy of your

9

original checklist?

10

A.

No.

11

Q.

Can you explain.

12

Is this a --

Is it a

re-creation of your original checklist?

13

A.

It is.

14

Q.

And why did you re-create your original

15

checklist?

16
17
18
19

A.

Excuse me.

I could not locate my printed

copy.
Q.

Did you believe you kept a printed copy of

the checklist?

20

A.

I did.

21

Q.

What --

22

belief?

23

A.

What is the basis for your

It's my practice to complete the checklist

24

on my computer.

25

have doesn't allow me to save it as a completed form.

However, the version of Adobe that I

Ann C. Kruger, Ph.D.

April 22, 2011
24

1

It, therefore, has to be printed out in order to

2

save.

There's no other way to save it.

3
4
5

So I printed it out and saved it, but I
could not put my hands on it.
Q.

Why did you fill out this checklist back

6

in the fall of 2009 when you completed the original

7

version?

8
9

A.

It's part of the procedure that we

undertake when we are creating Ereserves to complete

10

a checklist for each item that we want to put on

11

Ereserves.

12
13

Q.

And is that pursuant to any kind of

directive or policy?

14

A.

It's a policy.

15

Q.

And when you re-created this checklist,

It's a requirement.

16

TX-2, Kruger TX-2, did you make an effort to fill it

17

out in the same way that you filled it out prior to

18

your fall 2009 --

19

A.

I did.

20

Q.

-- course?

21

A.

I did.

22

Q.

And when you originally filled out the

23

checklist in the fall of 2009 timeframe, did you make

24

a good-faith effort to conduct a fair use analysis in

25

accordance with the checklist?