Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Counsel Concerns
Downloading Suits/Rule 11 Sanctions. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas denied a defense motion in an Internet downloading case for sanctions against record-company plaintiffs' counsel. The court instead assessed sanctions against the defendant's lawyer. Atlantic Recording Corp. v. Heslep, 4:06-CV-132-Y. The record companies sued Diane Heslep, alleging copyright infringement by peer-to-peer file sharing. The district court noted: 'Heslep argues that Plaintiffs' attorneys should be sanctioned because she has established that she was at work at the exact date and time the amended complaint alleges she was online infringing on Plaintiffs' copyrights, that AOL has confirmed that she was not herself online at the specific date and time in question, and that AOL could not identify the specific computer in use at the date and time in question. The evidence suggests that these assertions are disingenuous, and they certainly do not support sanctioning Plaintiffs' attorneys.'
The court added: '[W]hether AOL can or cannot confirm what specific computer was on the internet on the date and time in question does not establish that Plaintiffs' attorneys committed sanctionable conduct under Rule 11 [of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] ' Moreover, the conduct of Plaintiffs' attorneys in attempting to resolve this dispute with Heslep has also been more than reasonable ' Rather, the court concludes that sanctions are appropriate against Heslep's attorney, Thomas Kimble. Among the many prohibitions contained in Rule 11, is one prohibiting an attorney from filing a motion for the purposes of harassment and unnecessarily increasing the cost of litigation.'
Downloading Suits/Rule 11 Sanctions. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas denied a defense motion in an Internet downloading case for sanctions against record-company plaintiffs' counsel. The court instead assessed sanctions against the defendant's lawyer. Atlantic Recording Corp. v. Heslep, 4:06-CV-132-Y. The record companies sued Diane Heslep, alleging copyright infringement by peer-to-peer file sharing. The district court noted: 'Heslep argues that Plaintiffs' attorneys should be sanctioned because she has established that she was at work at the exact date and time the amended complaint alleges she was online infringing on Plaintiffs' copyrights, that AOL has confirmed that she was not herself online at the specific date and time in question, and that AOL could not identify the specific computer in use at the date and time in question. The evidence suggests that these assertions are disingenuous, and they certainly do not support sanctioning Plaintiffs' attorneys.'
The court added: '[W]hether AOL can or cannot confirm what specific computer was on the internet on the date and time in question does not establish that Plaintiffs' attorneys committed sanctionable conduct under Rule 11 [of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] ' Moreover, the conduct of Plaintiffs' attorneys in attempting to resolve this dispute with Heslep has also been more than reasonable ' Rather, the court concludes that sanctions are appropriate against Heslep's attorney, Thomas Kimble. Among the many prohibitions contained in Rule 11, is one prohibiting an attorney from filing a motion for the purposes of harassment and unnecessarily increasing the cost of litigation.'
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.