In a federal Central District of California case recently, a magistrate judge ruled that the defendants, the TorrentSpy Web site operators, had to produce to plaintiffs information that would temporarily appear in the future in the defendants' Web servers' RAM ('random-access memory'), even though that information was never saved to a hard drive or other non-volatile form of memory (Columbia Pictures v.
The Sky Is Not Falling!
The decision of the magistrate in the TorrentSpy case that the server-log data was subject to discovery has resulted in an outcry of opposition from various sources across the country, and the defendants have appealed the decision to the district judge. But while the decision ordering the production of such server-log data in the future seems incorrect on the issue of whether that information in RAM constitutes electronically stored information subject to discovery, for the reasons set forth below, the decision is not as momentous as many have suggested.
By
Douglas L. RogersThis premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.
