Epidemic Sound, AB v. Meta Platforms, Inc.
- Jacquelyn Corley
- 3:22-cv-04223
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Epidemic Sound v. Meta, Judge Corley denied reconsideration leave, ordered Meta’s export, and granted sealing motions except for specified material.
Epidemic Sound, AB and Meta Platforms, Inc.; the order directly affected their discovery obligations and the treatment of documents filed with the court.
What happened
In Epidemic Sound, AB v. Meta Platforms, Inc., Epidemic asked the court to reconsider its earlier refusal to require Meta to provide a complete export of data from Epidemic’s Rights Manager account. The data concerned Epidemic’s works and alleged unauthorized uses.
The court denied Epidemic’s motion for permission to seek reconsideration because Epidemic had not met the required standard. But the court used its authority over ongoing orders to require Meta to produce the on-demand account export by February 14, 2025.
Judge Jacquelyn Corley also granted the parties’ requests to keep most identified business and negotiation information secret, except for specified information and documents, and ordered the parties to refile materials by February 21, 2025.
The detailed version
- Epidemic Sound, AB v. Meta Platforms, Inc. · No. 3:22-cv-04223
- Jacquelyn Corley
- Jan. 30, 2025
Background
Epidemic asked Meta to produce a full export of all data associated with Epidemic’s Rights Manager account. Epidemic said the information was important for identifying, litigating, and resolving the full scope of alleged unauthorized uses of its works by Meta. On October 10, 2024, the court declined to require production for the stated purpose of expanding the number of copyrighted works asserted, given the difficulty of producing relevant discovery for the 900 works already at issue.
Epidemic later filed a motion seeking reconsideration and an order compelling a complete export. The court struck that motion for failure to comply with Civil Local Rule 7-9, while allowing Epidemic to file a motion for permission to seek reconsideration accompanied by the proposed reconsideration and discovery motion. Epidemic then filed the motion addressed in this order.
Reconsideration and Discovery
The court denied Epidemic’s motion for permission to file a motion for reconsideration. Under Civil Local Rule 7-9(b), Epidemic had to make the required showing, but the court found that it had not done so. The court rejected, among other arguments, Epidemic’s claim that the court had failed to consider evidence concerning Meta’s affirmative defenses because Epidemic had not raised that issue in its portion of the earlier joint discovery letter. The court also said it had considered the district court decisions Epidemic cited and that those decisions were not dispositive legal arguments under the rule.
The court nevertheless stated that it had inherent authority to reconsider its October 10, 2024 interlocutory order, meaning an order that does not finally resolve the case. Exercising that authority, the court ordered Meta to produce the on-demand export of Epidemic’s Rights Manager account no later than February 14, 2025.
Sealing Rulings
The parties filed administrative motions concerning whether documents designated as confidential should be filed under seal. Because the materials were unrelated or only tangentially related to the underlying claim, the court applied the “good cause” standard. That standard requires a particularized showing that disclosure would cause specific prejudice or harm.
The court granted the motions to seal except for four categories. The court declined to maintain confidentiality concerning whether the on-demand export was time-limited, because Meta’s counsel said that time was not a limiting factor. It also declined to maintain confidentiality concerning whether Meta had provided on-demand exports to other rights holders, because Meta’s counsel acknowledged that it had. The court further excluded specified lines in Docket No. 216-2 and ruled that Docket No. 215-4 could not be sealed in full. The parties were ordered to meet and confer and file documents consistent with the sealing order by February 21, 2025.
Disposition
The court denied Epidemic’s motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration. Separately, it ordered Meta to produce the on-demand account export by February 14, 2025, granted the sealing motions except as described above, and ordered the parties to refile documents according to the sealing ruling by February 21, 2025. The order disposed of Docket Nos. 202, 203, 209, 210, and 216.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.