This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Richard L. Stone

By Ryne Hodkowski | Sep. 12, 2013

Sep. 12, 2013

Richard L. Stone

See more on Richard L. Stone

Jenner & Block LLP | Los Angeles | Practice type: Litigation


Stone and his team are currently winning on this side of the country and experiencing some setbacks on the East Coast in one of the biggest battles in the television industry yet. And it's looking increasingly likely that Stone will soon have to pack his bags and head to Washington, D.C. for an ultimate showdown in the U.S. Supreme Court.


Stone is representing Fox in a dispute against FilmOn X LLC in California and against Aereo Inc. in New York. Both services transmit over-the-air TV signals digitally to their subscribers, which has the major networks fuming over copyright issues and the potential loss of highly lucrative retransmission rights.


In December, U.S. District Judge George H. Wu granted a preliminary injunction in favor of Fox against FilmOn X in the Central District of California. It's been more difficult to convince the New York courts - a district court and the 2nd Circuit both denied preliminary injunctions against Aereo.


"The court in California is not constrained by Cablevision," Stone said, referring to a 2008 2nd Circuit decision which ruled that Cablevision's remote storage DVR did not commit copyright infringement. "In California, the court just looked at actual copyright fact. The 2nd Circuit has to follow Cablevision's idiosyncratic interpretation."


Stone and Fox have also filed suit against FilmOn in Washington, D.C., as the current injunction is limited to the 9th Circuit. A panel heard oral arguments on the motion for a preliminary injunction in late August.


Stone said the circuit split makes the case ripe for a Supreme Court hearing.


"Whether it happens next year or two years from now, I'm pretty confident that the Supreme Court will take it up," he said. "We're hoping sooner rather than later."

- RYNE HODKOWSKI

#269635

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com