Free Statement - District Court of Arizona - Arizona


File Size: 60.0 kB
Pages: 2
Date: October 7, 2005
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 374 Words, 2,383 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/43328/57-8.pdf

Download Statement - District Court of Arizona ( 60.0 kB)


Preview Statement - District Court of Arizona
Case 2:04-cv-00408-SIVIIVI Document 57-8 FiIed10/07/2005 Page10f2

1 attomey-client privileges, or other applicable privileges or doctrines.
3 Non-Uniform Interrogatory 6
4 Counsel for Defendants, Laura Zeman, sent Plaintiffs' counsel a letter dated July
5 19, 2004. Page 2 of that correspondence states "[m]oreover, Jason Napier also used
6 V other reference material for inspiration in creating his sculpture entitled' Precious
7 ‘ Cargo."' Please state with specyicity the precise "other reference material" that Jason
8 Napier used for inspiration in creating the "Precious Cargo" sculpture.
9 Response to Non-Uniform Interrogatogy 6 -
10 Other reference material used by Mr. Napier to create his sculpture include, but are
ll not limited to, all documents, photographs, pictures, and drawings included on the CD `
E 12 bearing bates number NAPIER001 1 which has already been produced by Defendants.
16 1 g 15 I »
Q \ —· The July 19, 2004 correspondence referenced above improperly assumes that the
J1 16 photograph of the mountain lion was taken "in nature." Since the July 19, 2004
O 17 correspondence was authored, it is now clear that Plaintiffs hired an animal trainer in
18 Bozeman, Montana to assist in capturing the image that has become known as "Mother
J 19 Mountain Lion with Baby in Mouth." Based on this information, please state
20 Defendants' current legal position concerning the protection of the expressionin the
21 subject photograph, knowing that substantial time, expense and effort went into
22 capturing the image known as "Mother Mountain Lion with Baby in Mouth."
23 Response to Non-Uniform Interrogatory 7.
_ 24 Unlike the Koons case on which Plaintiffs rely, the animal trainer retained by Mr.
25 Dyer did not pose the mother mountain lion with the baby mountain lion in its mouth.
26 The idea of a mother mountain lion perched on a rock with a baby mountain lion in its
· 27 mouth is an idea expressed in nature and is therefore not protectable. Therefore,
. 28 Defendants believe that the scope of protection for Mr. Dyer’s photograph is very narrow.
as%82iO4—cv—OO4O8-SIVIIVI Document 57-87 - Filed 10/O7/2005 Page 2 of 2 - h'

Case 2:04-cv-00408-SMM

Document 57-8

Filed 10/07/2005

Page 1 of 2

Case 2:04-cv-00408-SMM

Document 57-8

Filed 10/07/2005

Page 2 of 2