Discovery Motions in Cablevision, Viacom Bundling Fight To Be Heard Sept. 11
A federal judge will hear oral argument Sept. 11 on dueling Cablevision and Viacom motions seeking to force the other to produce unredacted copies of nonprivileged information that each says it's withholding because of contractual confidentiality obligations. The hearing will…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
be before U.S. Magistrate Judge James Cott of U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The case stems from the 2013 lawsuit Cablevision filed against Viacom and its Black Entertainment Television in which the cable company alleged it was coerced by Viacom's market power into carrying channels it doesn't want (see 1302270032). Viacom countersued in 2014, saying Cablevision fraudulently induced Viacom into their 2012 affiliation agreement just for the purpose of then suing Viacom and claiming the agreement was illegal so the court could then rewrite it to Cablevision's benefit. As part of its defense, Viacom has sought such materials as Cablevision affiliation and licensing agreements, rate information that was exchanged between Cablevision and third parties, and related documents spelling out terms of Cablevision agreements with other programmers, while Cablevision has sought much the same from Viacom. Contractual counterparties have objected to that material being produced in discovery, and in July, Cott approved a motion allowing a variety of third-party content providers including CBS, Discovery Communications, ESPN and HBO to intervene in the case (see 1507280051). Cablevision and Viacom agreed to seek relief from the Manhattan court "in the form of motions to compel that neither party would oppose," court paperwork said.