Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
appeal_fact_check [2017/01/04 17:55] – reformat caption Carlos Pedrazaappeal_fact_check [2017/01/04 18:44] – removes byline since based on reporting by OSwriter on TrekBBS. Carlos Pedraza
Line 12: Line 12:
 //**After Losing Its Fair Use Defense, How Much Can Axanar Count on the 'Liberal' Ninth Circuit?**// //**After Losing Its Fair Use Defense, How Much Can Axanar Count on the 'Liberal' Ninth Circuit?**//
 {{TOC}} {{TOC}}
-<WRAP> 
-//**__ __**// <wrap lo>**By [[user>cpedraza|Carlos Pedraza]]**</wrap> 
-</WRAP> 
  
 <wrap lo>See also: //[[fair_use_denied|Judge Denies Axanar Its Fair Use Defense]]//</wrap> <wrap lo>See also: //[[fair_use_denied|Judge Denies Axanar Its Fair Use Defense]]//</wrap>
Line 73: Line 70:
 The two most relevant cases where Ranahan was listed (again, not as the lead attorney) don't really shed much light on how the Ninth Circuit would respond to an appeal in a case like Axanar's. The first case, UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Shelter Capital Partners, involved the application of the safe harbor provision under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The second case, Graham-Sult v. Clainos, dealt with misappropriation of intellectual property. The two most relevant cases where Ranahan was listed (again, not as the lead attorney) don't really shed much light on how the Ninth Circuit would respond to an appeal in a case like Axanar's. The first case, UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Shelter Capital Partners, involved the application of the safe harbor provision under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The second case, Graham-Sult v. Clainos, dealt with misappropriation of intellectual property.
  
-In both cases Ranahan's client supported affirming, not reversing, the district court. That's critical because, as noted above, affirmances are statistically much more likely than reversals. And in Graham-Sult, the Ninth Circuit actually reversed on one issue, //against// the position advocated by Ranahan's client. {{:axamonitor-ico.gif?nolink|}}+In both cases, Ranahan's client supported affirming, not reversing, the district court. That's critical because, as noted above, affirmed decisions are statistically much more likely than reversals. And in Graham-Sult, the Ninth Circuit actually reversed on one issue, //against// the position advocated by Ranahan's client. {{:axamonitor-ico.gif?nolink|}}
  
 ---- ----
-**Keywords** {{tag>appeal Erin_Ranahan defendants defense counsel}}+**Keywords** {{tag>appeal Erin_Ranahan defendants defense counsel fact_check}}