Capitol Records, LLC v. Redigi Inc.
Filing
308
LETTER addressed to Judge Richard J. Sullivan from C. Dennis Loomis dated December 29, 2016 re: Correction of Statement Made by Capital's Counsel in His December 29, 2016 Letter to the Court. Document filed by John Ossenmacher, Redigi Inc..(Loomis, C. Dennis)
Baker Hostetler
Baker&Hostetler LLP
11601 Wilshire Boulevard
Suite 1400
Los Angeles, CA 90025-0509
T 310.820 .8800
F 3 10.820 .885 9
www.bakerlaw.com
December 29, 2016
C. Dennis Loomis
direct dial : 310.442.8865
cdloomis@bakerlaw.com
VIAECF
Hon. Richard J. Sullivan, U.S.D.J.
Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse
40 Foley Square, Room 2104
New York, NY 10007
Re:
Capital Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc., et al., 12 cv. 0095 (RJS)
Dear Judge Sullivan:
We are appellate counsel for defendants and appellants ReDigi, Inc. ("ReDigi"), John
Ossenmacher and Larry Rogel, aka Larry Rudolf (collectively "Appellants").
We write briefly to correct a statement made by Capitol's counsel in his December 29, 2016
letter to the Court, in which Capitol responded to the Court's request for additional information
objecting to the unsealing of Docket Nos. 57 (Exhibit 6), 74 (Exhibit 3), 76, 78, 90, and 91
(Exhibit 1). As Capitol acknowledges, each of these documents "contain excerpts from
Plaintiffs' 2003 "Digital Music Download Agreement" with Apple and various later amendments
to such agreement (collectively, the "Apple Agreements"), as well as further references to and
discussion of such agreement and Capitol's contractual arrangement with Apple."
Capitol argues that such information should remain confidential because it has "no bearing on
the outcome of the case." Capitol is mistaken. Regardless of the arguments advanced by
ReDigi's prior counsel, ReDigi intends to rely on the Apple Agreements in support of its first
sale defense. ReDigi believes the Apple Agreements to show that (1) Capitol specifically
authorized Apple to sell the iTunes music files to consumers and (2) that consumers who
lawfully purchased iTunes music files from Apple acquired ownership of those music files.
ReDigi also believes the Apple Agreements are relevant as they show that Apple and Capital
regarded the transfer of an iTunes music file as the sale of a phonorecord. ReDigi intends to
quote various provisions of the Apple Agreements in support of these arguments.
Atlanta
Chicago
Houston
Los Angeles
Cincinnati
New Yori<
Cleveland
Orlando ยท
Co lumbus
Philadelphia
Costa Mesa
Denver
Seattle
Washington, DC
Hon. Richard J. Sullivan, U.S.D.J.
December 29, 2016
Page 2
ReDigi respectfully submits that in considering whether Capitol has made a sufficient showing to
justify continuing to maintain these documents under seal, the Court should be aware that ReDigi
believes the Apple Agreements to be highly relevant to its appeal.
Sincerely,
Baker & Hostetler LLP
Isl C. Dennis Loomis
C. Dennis Loomis
Partner
cc:
All Parties Receiving Notice via ECF
610167340.1
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?