BMG, Cox Seek Injunction, new Trial Cases in Advance of Oral Argument
Cox Communications pushed back at BMG Rights Management's motions for a permanent injunction and for a judgment as a matter of law for vicarious infringement, in a pair of filings Friday in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia. BMG simultaneously…
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.
filed an opposition to Cox's motion for a new trial. The court is scheduled to hear oral argument Feb. 26 on BMG and Cox motions on the copyright infringement complaints first brought by BMG in 2014 (see 1601270012). The BMG-sought injunction "is hopelessly vague to the acts that it would restrain or require [and] strongly suggests that it expects Cox to spy on its customers' activities and terminate their Internet accounts," Cox said. Such an injunction also wouldn't stop piracy of BMG works via BitTorrent sites and would punish "consumers by terminating their Internet accounts based on mere accusations, with no due process," Cox said. Even if the court granted such an injunction, Cox said it plans to seek a stay of the judgment, including any injunction. On BMG's motion seeking to overturn the jury ruling that Cox wasn't liable for vicarious infringement, Cox said BMG isn't complaining about the court's jury instructions and said BMG is arguing essentially that the court should reverse that ruling "because the jury did not accept BMG's arguments about supervision." Cox said trial evidence showed it had no direct financial interest in any BMG infringement. In its own motion, BMG said Cox's new trial motion "seeks to re-litigate a smorgasbord of legal and evidentiary issues that the Court has previously decided against it -- often multiple times." The jury's findings of contributory infringement, direct infringement and willful actions by Cox came from "overwhelming evidence" while the jury received proper instruction, BMG said. It said Cox -- contrary to the cable ISP's arguments -- produced ample testimony and documents about its graduated response system and handling of copyright infringement on its network.