After the court ruled July 25 that Grande Communications Networks needed to post a bond for the court to stay execution of the record labels’ $46.8 million copyright infringement judgment pending appeal (see 2307260048), Grande moved for approval of a $46.9 million supersedeas bond. But Grande’s proposed bond is “insufficient as a matter of law,” said the labels’ memorandum of law Tuesday (docket 1:17-cv-00365) in U.S. District Court for Western Texas in Austin in opposition. Grande is seeking to vacate a Nov. 3 jury verdict awarding UMG and other plaintiffs $46.8 million in damages resulting from Grande’s willful contributory infringement of 1,403 copyrighted works. Grande’s proposed bond doesn’t make the surety “immediately and unconditionally liable for the judgment” if Grande doesn’t prevail on appeal, said the memorandum. It says instead the surety will become liable only if Grande first fails to pay the judgment, it said. Imposing such a condition precedent on the surety’s liability fails to protect the labels’ security interest in their judgment “and is impermissibly vague about when the surety will become liable,” it said. Grande’s bond should instead state clearly that the surety is immediately liable for the judgment if Grande doesn’t prevail on appeal, but such liability “is obviated if Grande satisfies the judgment itself,” it said. The amount of Grande’s bond also doesn’t account for post-judgment interest, as is required in the 5th Circuit, it said. As a result, the bond as proposed fails to “sufficiently protect” the labels’ interests pending Grande’s appeal, it said. The court should deny Grande’s motion for approval of its supersedeas bond and stay of judgment “until the deficiencies in Grande’s bond are corrected,” it said.

Arm Holdings “can provide no assurances” about the outcome of its litigation with Qualcomm and Nuvia, said Arm’s F-1 registration statement Monday at the SEC for its forthcoming initial public offering. Arm also can’t predict how the litigation will affect its relationship with Qualcomm, “which is currently a major customer of ours” and generated 11% of Arm’s total revenue for the fiscal year ended March 31, said the F-1. The case is in the discovery phase, with trial set for September 2024 (see 2212190066), it said. The litigation “will likely require significant legal expenditures,” it said. “It may also require substantial time and attention from our executives or employees, which could distract them from operating our business.” it said. Arm’s involvement in such litigation “could cause us to incur significant reputational damage in the industry, in our relationship with Qualcomm or in our relationship with other third-party partners,” said the F-1. Qualcomm spent more than $1 billion to buy Nuvia, a startup led by former Apple and Google engineers that licensed Arm technologies to develop high-performance processor cores for semiconductor chips. “In the process,” alleged Arm’s Aug. 31, 2022, complaint, Qualcomm “caused Nuvia to breach its Arm licenses, leading Arm to terminate those licenses, in turn requiring Qualcomm and Nuvia to stop using and destroy any Arm-based technology developed under the licenses.” Qualcomm countersued in October for a declaratory judgment that it has complied with its contractual obligations to Arm.

The Old Fountain Tavern in suburban Atlanta, and its owner, Stephen Clark, are publicly performing musical compositions in connection with the operation of the Dacula business without the authorization or license of the copyright owners, alleged BMI and eight music publishers in an infringement complaint Thursday (docket 1:23-cv-03657) in U.S. District Court for Northern Georgia in Atlanta. BMI contacted Clark more than 40 times by phone, letter and email since April 19 “in an effort to educate” him about his “obligations under the Copyright Act,” and the “necessity of purchasing a license for the public performance of musical compositions” in the BMI repertoire, said the complaint. BMI sent Clark multiple cease and desist notices, giving him “formal notice that he must immediately cease all use of BMI-licensed music” in his tavern, it said. The plaintiffs allege six claims of willful copyright infringement, based on Clark’s “unauthorized public performance of musical compositions” from the BMI repertoire. Unless the court “restrains” Clark from committing further acts of copyright infringement, the plaintiffs “will suffer irreparable injury for which they have no adequate remedy at law,” it said. Besides injunctive relief, the complaint seeks statutory damages, plus court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees.

U.S. District Judge John Koeltl for Southern New York in Manhattan resolved in Internet Archive’s favor the parties' dispute over the scope of the permanent injunction barring IA from scanning print copies of physical books and lending the digital copies to users of IA’s website without the publishers’ permission (see 2308140002), said his signed order Friday (docket 1:20-cv-04160). The “narrowly tailored” injunction will apply only to physical books that also have an ebook component, as IA wanted, said the order. The publishers wanted the injunction to cover all books in any format. The action concerned the unauthorized distribution of a select number of books, all of which were commercially available as authorized ebooks, said the order. “That fact was relevant” to the court's conclusion when it granted summary judgment in the publishers’ favor, finding IA was liable for copyright infringement, it said. An injunction covering all in-print books, including those the publishers haven’t made available for electronic licensing, risks going beyond the scope of the issues tried in the case, the order said. “What matters here” is that the case didn’t concern copyrighted works that aren’t yet available in electronic form, “and the parties therefore did not brief the legal issues related to such works,” it said.

Frolic Pictures’ owner Jared Masters seeks an order denying Redoak Communications’ June 30 motion for default for his failure to plead or otherwise defend Redoak’s allegations that he unlawfully sold DVD copies of the horror film Just Before Dawn online without authorization, said Masters’ affidavit Thursday (docket 9:23-cv-80008) in U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in West Palm Beach. Redoak can’t produce “any documentation, whatsoever,” to support its claim it owns “the copyright at issue,” it said.

Plaintiff Redoak Communications and defendant Amazon “settled their respective claims for relief and defenses asserted in this litigation” in which Redoak alleged Amazon was selling unlicensed VHS, DVD and Blu-ray copies online of the horror film Just Before Dawn, said their stipulation of dismissal Wednesday (docket 9:23-cv-80008) in U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in West Palm Beach. The parties asked the court to dismiss with prejudice Redoak’s claims against Amazon, and to assert parties will bear their own attorneys’ fees and court costs. U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra granted those requests in a signed order Wednesday. Amazon’s March 1 counterclaims asserted Redoak’s infringement allegations were barred by the first-sale doctrine, but Amazon dismissed those counterclaims June 30 (see 2307030010).

Cisco and Poly seek an order from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissing with prejudice Cisco’s trade secrets misappropriation appeal against Poly, said their stipulated motion Friday (docket 23-15590). The parties agreed each side will bear its own costs and fees on appeal, said the motion. The parties also stipulated to dismissal with prejudice of the underlying case in the Northern District of California, it said. Cisco alleged Wilson Chung, its former hardware and software architect, improperly kept “substantial Cisco confidential information” for the Cisco 730 headset and the Webex Desk Pro when he left Cisco in 2019 to join Poly, then disclosed those trade secrets to other Poly employees (see 2304220002). Cisco moved last week to dismiss its appeal against Chung (see 2307270029).

U.S. District Judge John Koeltl for Southern New York in Manhattan granted his 10th deadline extension to Aug. 11 to the parties in the lawsuit in which four book publishers were granted summary judgment March 24 to thwart the Internet Archive from scanning print copies of physical books and lending the digital copies to users of IA’s website without the publishers’ permission (see 2303270006). The judge originally gave the parties an April 7 deadline to submit a proposal for the appropriate procedure to determine the judgment to be entered in the case. In each of the last several deadline extension requests, the parties told the judge they were “cautiously optimistic” there would be no further requests. Koeltl’s handwritten order Friday (docket 1:20-cv-04160) said there would be “no further extensions.”

Cisco seeks to dismiss with prejudice Wilson Chung from its trade secrets misappropriation appeal against Poly, said its motion Wednesday (docket 23-15590) in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The parties agreed to bear their own fees and costs, said the motion. Cisco had alleged Chung, its former hardware and software architect, improperly kept “substantial Cisco confidential information” for the Cisco 730 headset and the Webex Desk Pro when he left Cisco in 2019 to join Poly, then disclosed those trade secrets to other Poly employees (see 2304220002). Cisco’s appeal against Poly remains pending.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Dustin Howell denied Grande Communications Networks’ motion to stay execution of judgment in a copyright infringement lawsuit by Universal Music Group (UMG) and other labels, said his Tuesday order (docket 1:17-cv-00365) in U.S. District Court for Western Texas in Austin. Grande sought to vacate a Nov. 3 jury verdict awarding UMG and other plaintiffs $46.8 million in damages resulting from Grande’s willful contributory infringement of 1,403 copyrighted works. Howell granted Grande’s conditional cross-motion for writ of execution contained in its opposition to Grande’s motion, it said. If Grande fails to secure a bond within 14 days of the order, a writ of execution should be issued and served by the U.S. Marshals Service to satisfy the judgment and costs of Grande, subject to execution by law, the order said.