Moonbug Entertainment Limited v. Babybus (Fujian) Network Technology Co., Ltd

District Court, N.D. California·Decided July 20, 2023·No. 3:21-cv-06536·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 6 7 MOONBUG ENTERTAINMENT Case No. 21-cv-06536-EMC LIMITED, et al., 8 Plaintiffs, FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS 9 v. 10 BABYBUS (FUJIAN) NETWORK 11 TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD, et al.,

12 Defendants.

13 14 15 The following constitute the Court’s proposed Final Jury Instructions in advance of the 16 charging conference on July 21, 2023. 17 19 20 Dated: July 20, 2023 21 22 ______________________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN 23 United States District Judge 24 25 26

27 2 3 JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 1 4 BURDEN OF PROOF – PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE 5 When a party has the burden of proving any claim or affirmative defense by a 6 preponderance of the evidence, it means you must be persuaded by the evidence that the claim or 7 affirmative defense is more probably true than not true. 8 You should base your decision on all the evidence, regardless of which party presented it. 9 10 [Court Notes: 9th Cir. Model Instruction No. 1.6.] 11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 2 3 The evidence you are to consider in deciding what the facts are consists of: 4 (1) the sworn testimony of any witness; 5 (2) the exhibits that are admitted into evidence; 6 (3) any facts to which the lawyers have agreed; and 7 (4) any facts that I have instructed you to accept as proved. 8 9 [Court Notes: 9th Cir. Model Instruction No. 1.9.]

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 3 3 In reaching your verdict, you may consider only the testimony and exhibits received into 4 evidence. Certain things are not evidence, and you may not consider them in deciding what the 5 facts are. I will list them for you: 6 (1) Arguments and statements by lawyers are not evidence. The lawyers are not 7 witnesses. What they have said in their opening statements, closing arguments and 8 at other times is intended to help you interpret the evidence, but it is not evidence. 9 If the facts as you remember them differ from the way the lawyers have stated 10 them, your memory of them controls. 11 (2) Questions and objections by lawyers are not evidence. Attorneys have a duty to 12 their clients to object when they believe a question is improper under the rules of 13 evidence. You should not be influenced by the objection or by the court’s ruling on 14 it. 15 (3) Testimony that is excluded or stricken, or that you have been instructed to 16 disregard, is not evidence and must not be considered. In addition, some evidence 17 was received only for a limited purpose; when I have instructed you to consider 18 certain evidence only for a limited purpose, you must do so and you may not 19 consider that evidence for any other purpose. 20 (4) Anything you may have seen or heard when the court was not in session is not 21 evidence. You are to decide the case solely on the evidence received at the trial. 22 23 [Court Notes: 9th Cir. Model Instruction No. 1.10.] 24 25 26 27 1 JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 4 3 Evidence may be direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence is direct proof of a fact, such as 4 testimony by a witness about what that witness personally saw or heard or did. Circumstantial 5 evidence is proof of one or more facts from which you could find another fact. You should 6 consider both kinds of evidence. The law makes no distinction between the weight to be given to 7 either direct or circumstantial evidence. It is for you to decide how much weight to give to any 8 evidence. 9 By way of example, if you wake up in the morning and see that the sidewalk is wet, you 10 may find from that fact that it rained during the night. However, other evidence, such as a turned 11 on garden hose, may provide a different explanation for the presence of water on the sidewalk. 12 Therefore, before you decide that a fact has been proved by circumstantial evidence, you must 13 consider all the evidence in the light of reason, experience and common sense. 14 15 [Court Notes: 9th Cir. Model Instruction No. 1.12.] 16 17

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 5 3 In deciding the facts in this case, you may have to decide which testimony to believe and 4 which testimony not to believe. You may believe everything a witness says, or part of it, or none 5 of it. 6 In considering the testimony of any witness, you may take into account: 7 (1) the opportunity and ability of the witness to see or hear or know the things testified 8 to; 9 (2) the witness’s memory; 10 (3) the witness’s manner while testifying; 11 (4) the witness’s interest in the outcome of the case, if any; 12 (5) the witness’s bias or prejudice, if any; 13 (6) whether other evidence corroborated or contradicted the witness’s testimony; 14 (7) the reasonableness of the witness’s testimony in light of all the evidence; and 15 (8) any other factors that bear on believability. 16 Sometimes a witness may say something that is not consistent with something else he or 17 she said. Sometimes different witnesses will give different versions of what happened. People 18 often forget things or make mistakes in what they remember. Also, two people may see the same 19 event but remember it differently. You may consider these differences, but do not decide that 20 testimony is untrue just because it differs from other testimony. 21 However, if you decide that a witness has deliberately testified untruthfully about 22 something important, you may choose not to believe anything that witness said. On the other 23 hand, if you think the witness testified untruthfully about some things but told the truth about 24 others, you may accept the part you think is true and ignore the rest. 25 The weight of the evidence as to a fact does not necessarily depend on the number of 26 witnesses who testify. What is important is how believable the witnesses were, and how much 27 weight you think their testimony deserves. 1 including unconscious bias. 2 3 [Court Notes: 9th Cir. Model Instruction No. 1.14. The Court has modified the 4 instruction.] 5

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 6 2 COPYRIGHT – DEFINED (17 U.S.C. § 106) 3 Copyright is the exclusive right to copy. This right to copy includes the exclusive rights to 4 or authorize others to: 5 1. reproduce the copyrighted works; 6 2. recast, transform, or adapt the work, that is prepare derivative works based upon the 7 copyrighted works, and to perform publicly derivative works based upon the copyrighted 8 audiovisual works; 9 3. distribute copies of the copyrighted works to the public; 10 4. publicly perform copyrighted audiovisual works; 11 5. display publicly a copyrighted audiovisual or graphic work; and 12 6. perform a sound recording. 13 It is the owner of a copyright who may exercise these exclusive rights. The term “owner” 14 includes the author of the work and the exclusive licensee of the work. In general, copyright law 15 protects against reproduction, adaptation, public distribution, public performance, public display 16 of identical or substantially similar copies of the owner’s copyrighted work without the owner’s 17 permission. An owner may enforce these rights to exclude others in an action for copyright 18 infringement. 19 20 [Court Notes: 9th Cir. Model Civil Jury Instruction No. 17.2. 21 This instruction is necessary because it defines copyright, including the exclusive rights 22 granted as part of each copyright, which is necessary for the jury in evaluating whether Babybus 23 infringed these rights.] 24 25 26 27 1 JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 7 2 COPYRIGHT — ELEMENTS — OWNERSHIP AND 3 COPYING (17 U.S.C. § 501(a)–(b)) 4 On the copyright infringement claim as to each disputed work, Plaintiffs first have the 5 burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that: 6 1.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Moonbug Entertainment Limited v. Babybus (Fujian) Network Technology Co., Ltd, (N.D. Cal. 2023).

Moonbug Entertainment Limited v. Babybus (Fujian) Network Technology Co., Ltd (Moonbug Entertainment Limited v. Babybus (Fujian) Network Technology Co., Ltd) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Edward Sylvester Hamilton
583 F.2d 448 (Ninth Circuit, 1978)
Baxter v. McA, Inc.
812 F.2d 421 (Ninth Circuit, 1987)
Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.
35 F.3d 1435 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
Satava v. Lowry
323 F.3d 805 (Ninth Circuit, 2003)
Bach v. Forever Living Products U.S., Inc.
473 F. Supp. 2d 1127 (W.D. Washington, 2007)
Online Policy Group v. Diebold, Inc.
337 F. Supp. 2d 1195 (N.D. California, 2004)
Elouise Cobell v. Sally Jewell
802 F.3d 12 (D.C. Circuit, 2015)
Dc Comics v. Mark Towle
802 F.3d 1012 (Ninth Circuit, 2015)
Jacobus Rentmeester v. Nike, Inc.
883 F.3d 1111 (Ninth Circuit, 2018)
Michael Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin
952 F.3d 1051 (Ninth Circuit, 2020)
Donna Corbello v. Frankie Valli
974 F.3d 965 (Ninth Circuit, 2020)
Automattic Inc. v. Steiner
82 F. Supp. 3d 1011 (N.D. California, 2015)