Viacom International, Inc. et al v. Youtube, Inc. et al
0ORIGINAL
Doc. 41
Case 1:07-cv-02103-LLS
Document 41
Filed 06/05/2007
Page 1 of 3
C Y I T ? STATES DISTRICT COURT SLIUTHEXN 3ISTRICT OF NEW YOXK
..............................
X
.,I G ; D INTERNATIONAL, INC . , : .COI
<;t
5 1
.,
07 Civ. 2103 (LLS)
Plaintiff,
-
against
-
!
I
YOUTUBZ, TNC., 1-JUTUEE, LLC and GOOGLE, INC. DeLendants.
I 1 I 1
z.
Order Permitting Filing of, and Denying, Motion to Intervene
Ms. Sandra .4r1rl Brads!iaw
Lilcas-Piorrow's L I ; 22, 2007 rr~o'cio:> /a/
to interver.e shall be accepted for filing slid di;ckete.l b y the
,.;Ierk.
-.t:e
1 1 : :
rn~-tionis denied.
by
The right Ms. Lucas-Dli>rrcw s~ek: re
I
3f
intervention is her claim that, as a child i;f ~7r~e of
1
t; l? i
a r t
.
rhe musical
compositicns
1l;ted
ir. tne
she
entitled by the "principle oi; [per] stirpes" earnings, r.:hich have not beer: That
: J
r l a stlare of t-tle composition's
paid her by ASCAP, of w I > i c t , !~Lalntiff 7iai.$rn is a member. claim involves a matter f s t in:lerit.ince law.
As shnwn
her ::lotion papers, she Ikas asserted i , ir? rhe United States 3istrict Clni~rt fr,r
iar unsucces:;fully, the District of Xeb:
he S ~ p r e m e
Jersey, rhe Court. of Appeals fcr tile Third ( : r u t :r:i, Court, and the iTnited Sthtes District Court District of New York. The personal
for the
Seuttlerr.
relationships
a~~ii i t a f . ~ ; i
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 1:07-cv-02103-LLS
Document 41
Filed 06/05/2007
Page 2 of 3
ir~l:c.ritar,co-lii~#~ issues ir~x~ol,~eci that claim are no proper part in cf t1.i~ lltiqatior~. Tk~ey are not copyright claims. Tney do r : 5 t
arlie under the Copyright Act, but are governed by state law. Nor does the claim she asserts "have a questlsn . ~ flaii sr facr
111
conncn"
wit-h this
action,
the
subject
f
~ ,
w i ~ h the
adjudicating
infringemelit To the
in this
litigation.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 24 (b).
extent she has an interest in asserting that the copyright. has beer1 infringed by the defendants, that interest is adequatell. rcprcserlccd by exisiir-g parties. Fed. R. Civ. P. 24 (a).
S1:e
may fear chat ASCAP wilL dissipate any funds Viacom recovers in tk-is litigation, by payments to the author's daughter and
grar~cisor! i n s ~ e a dof to her. nothing in cornrnon with this
But her claim to such proceeds has litigation, and as held by Hori.
Kimba I.jooci, this Court has no jurisdiction over it.
San-lra Arm Civ.
Hradshaw Lucas-Morrow v. ASCAP and United States, 1Jo. ir2070 (KMW) (S.3.N.Y. Mar. 12, 2007).
Case 1:07-cv-02103-LLS
Document 41
Filed 06/05/2007
Page 3 of 3
14s.
~ ~ c ; i s - ! . l o r r o ~ , motion ~'s
ro
inter-rene is
a c c e p ~ e d ior
fi; ~ n g , n d is denied. _ a
So a r d e r e d .
?ated: 1.1.;~ York, W V Jul~e 4, 2007
L o u i s L. Stantoc L 1 . S . D . J.