The record label plaintiffs today filed their responses to brief motions filed by Joel Tenenbaum on Tuesday.
1) The labels opposed Tenenbaum's' Motion to Waive Witness Fees, or in the Alternative, for the Court to Call Witnesses Pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 614(a). As expected, the labels argue that since the two individuals at issue live outside of the District of Massachusetts, the court has no power under FRCP 45 to compel them to come to Boston for trial. In addition, argues the brief, "Defendant has put forward no evidence that he is indigent or otherwise cannot afford to pay the fees associated with the issuance of a subpoena."
2) The labels do not oppose Tenenbaum's Motion for Lawyer-Conducted Voir Dire.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
1 comment:
Comments here are moderated. I appreciate substantive comments, whether or not they agree with what I've written. Stay on topic, and be civil. Comments that contain name-calling, personal attacks, or the like will be rejected. If you want to rant about how evil the RIAA and MPAA are, and how entertainment companies' employees and attorneys are bad people, there are plenty of other places for you to go.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
As I have posted previously, to be safe, I would have also cited 45(c)(3) which requires a court to quash such subpoenas in case they tried to get a subpoena issued from Washington DC.
ReplyDelete