The Authors Guild et al v. Google Inc.
MOTION to File Amicus Brief of Computer & Communications Industry Association. Document filed by Computer and Communications Industry Association. (Attachments: # 1 CCIA Amicus Curiae Brief)(Schruers, Matthew)
The Author's Guild et al v. Google Inc.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
The Authors Guild, Inc., Association of American Publishers, Inc., et al., Plaintiffs, Case No. 05 CV 8136-DC v. Google Inc., Defendant. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE COMPUTER & COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION (CCIA) AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF Pursuant to the Court's orders dated November 14, 2008 (Order Granting Preliminary Settlement Approval) and April 28, 2009 (Order granting four-month extension), the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) respectfully moves for leave to file the attached brief amicus curiae on the proposed Settlement Agreement in this case.1 CCIA is a non-profit trade association dedicated to open markets, open systems, and open networks. CCIA members participate in the information and communications technology industries, ranging from small entrepreneurial firms to the largest in the business. CCIA members employ nearly one million people and generate annual revenues exceeding $200 billion. CCIA members are substantially regulated by as well as being the beneficiaries of the copyright system, and they depend upon it to fulfill its constitutional purpose of promoting progress. Thus, copyright law, the status of orphan works, licensing arrangements, and the
A complete list of CCIA's members, which includes defendant Google, Inc. and other search engine providers, is available online at . By way of disclosure, it is stated that CCIA has no parent company of any kind, and no publicly held corporation has an ownership stake of 10% or more in CCIA. 1
competitive implications of intellectual property significantly affect CCIA members. The attached brief is less than 20 pages, and provides an industry perspective on competitive aspects of the settlement, including the effects of the settlement on the technology marketplace, consumers, and thereby class plaintiffs. In addition to offering expertise with respect to Internet and information technology issues, CCIA has been an advocate or litigant in the most significant disputes over information technology competition in the past 35 years, including the telephone monopoly, mainframe computers, and PC operating systems. Because the Association represents a diverse group of innovative technology companies committed to openness and competition, the brief will provide a unique perspective on this settlement that will inform the Court's review. For these reasons, CCIA requests the Court's permission to submit the attached amicus curiae brief.
Respectfully submitted, /s/ Matthew Schruers Matthew Schruers (pro hac vice) Senior Counsel, Litigation & Legislative Affairs Counsel for Amicus Curiae Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) 900 Seventeenth Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 783-0070 email@example.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
The Authors Guild, Inc., Association of American Publishers, Inc., et al., Plaintiffs, v. Google Inc., Defendant.
Case No. 05 CV 8136-DC [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE
The motion of the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) for leave to file a brief amicus curiae in the above captioned matter is granted.
_________________________________ United States District Judge
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 8th day of September, 2009, I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS BRIEF and attachments with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will then send a notification of such filing (NEF) to the following: Adam Howard Charnes Alex Seth Fonoroff , S Alexandra A. E. Shapiro Amin S. Kassam Andrew C. DeVore Bruce P. Keller Cynthia S. Arato Daniel J. Fetterman Daniel Joseph Kornstein Daralyn Jeannine Durie David A. Zapolsky Harold Bloom James Taylor Lewis Grimmelmann Jeffrey A. Conciatori Joanne E. Zack Joseph C. Gratz Joseph M. Beck Joseph Solomon Hall Laura Helen Gundersheim Michael J. Boni Mikaela Ann McDermott Nathan Z. Dershowitz Peter Jonathan Toren Ronald Lee Raider Sanford P. Dumain Shirley Othmana Saed Theodore Conrad Max (firstname.lastname@example.org) (email@example.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org) (email@example.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org) (email@example.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org) (email@example.com) (DKornstein@KVWMail.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org) (email@example.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org) (email@example.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org) (email@example.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org) (email@example.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org) (Laurag@blbglaw.com) (email@example.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org) (email@example.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org) (email@example.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org) (SaedS@dsmo.com) (email@example.com)
And I further certify that I will mail the document by U.S. mail to the following non-filing users: Cindy A. Cohn Legal Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation 454 Shotwell Street San Francisco, CA 94110 J. Kate Reznick Boni & Zack LLC 15 St. Asaphs Road Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
David Nimmer Irell & Manella, L.L.P. att: David Blasband 1800 Avenue of the Stars Suite 900 Los Angeles, CA 90067
Hadley Perkins Roeltgen Kohn, Swift & Graf, P.C. One South Broad Street Suite 2100 Philadelphia, PA 19107
Sept. 8, 2009
/s/ Matthew Schruers Matthew Schruers (pro hac vice) Senior Counsel, Litigation & Legislative Affairs Counsel for Amicus Curiae Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) 900 Seventeenth Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 783-0070 firstname.lastname@example.org
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?