Indication of Intention of Internet Distribution Warrants Protective Order Over Deposition Videotape

The court partially granted a third-party defendant’s motion for a protective order and set restrictions on the third-party plaintiff’s (defendant’s) ability to videotape a deposition. “⁠[Defendant] has indicated that videotaping the deposition is being sought based on, inter alia, the preference of showing videos at trial rather than reading transcripts. The articulation of such reason suffices to allow the videotaping of the deposition. At the same time, the record includes indications of Plaintiff’s use of the Internet to make assertions regarding the parties’ dispute. Indeed, [defendant] indicates that public dissemination of the video deposition will facilitate her ability to ‘tell her story.’ Although not entirely clear, it appears [defendant] intends to do so in part for commercial gain. While [defendant] indicates that she will not disseminate the video ‘outside of the case in the near future,’ the Court is not persuaded that such a limitation obviates the need for a protective order. In short, the Court does not find that circumstances warrant denying [defendant’s] the ability to videotape [the] deposition, but the deposition recording (both video and written transcript) shall be used only for purposes of this litigation.”

On Demand Direct Response, LLC et al v. McCart-Pollak, 2-15-cv-01576 (NVD 2018-04-09, Order) (Nancy J. Koppe)

2018-04-12T11:52:02+00:00 April 12th, 2018|Docket Report, Trademark|