1

2 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF NEW YORK : TRIAL TERM: PART 3
3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X

4 FRANK DARABONT, FERENC, INC., DARKWOODS
PRODUCTIONS, INC. and CREATIVE ARTISTS
5 AGENCY, LLC,

6 Plaintiffs,

7 - against -

8 AMC NETWORK ENTERTAINMENT LLC, AMC FILM
HOLDINGS LLC, AMC NETWORKS INC., STU
9 STEGALL PRODUCTIONS, INC. and
DOES 1 THROUGH 10,
10
Defendants.
11
12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X
13 Index No. 654328/2014

14 June 5, 2014
60 Centre Street
15 New York, New York 10007

16 B E F O R E: HON. EILEEN BRANSTEN, Justice
17
18 A P P E A R A N C E S: (via telephone conference)
19
BLANK ROME, LLP
20 Attorneys for the Plaintiffs
The Chrysler Building
21 405 Lexington Avenue
New York, New York 10174
22 BY: JERRY BERNSTEIN, ESQ.
23 - and -
24 KINSELLA WEITZMAN ISER KUMP & ALDISERT, LLP
808 Wilshire Boulevard - 3rd Floor
25 Beverly Hills, California 90401
BY: DALE KINSELLA, ESQ.
26 AARON LISKIN, ESQ.
2
2 A P P E A R A N C E S: (Cont'd)
3
4 KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN, LLP
Attorneys for the Defendants
5 1633 Broadway
New York, New York 10019
6 BY: MARC E. KASOWITZ, ESQ.
AARON MARKS, ESQ.
7 JOHN BERLINSKI, ESQ.
MANSI SHAH, ESQ.
8

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
3
2 A F T E R N O O N S E S S I O N
3 (Telephone dialed and ringing.)
4 THE COURT: Are they on?
5 THE CLERK: Yes, your Honor.
6 THE COURT: Well, we had to call them, right?
7 THE CLERK: Yes.
8 THE COURT: Good afternoon.
9 This is Justice Bransten. What's that noise?
10 Hello? Is anybody there?
11 MR. BERNSTEIN: Hello, your Honor. We're here,
12 Judge.
13 THE COURT: Can you hear me?
14 MR. BERNSTEIN: You sound pretty far away, but we
15 can hear.
16 THE COURT: Let's get one thing straight. From
17 now on, you call me when everybody is on the line, all
18 right? Let's do that that way.
19 Second thing, nobody speaks unless they identify
20 themselves by name and by law firm. I realize that the
21 plaintiff is represented by Blank Rome.
22 There's also -- I don't know -- who's Kinsella
23 Weitzman Iser Kump & Aldisert?
24 MR. BERNSTEIN: They are also lawyers for the
25 plaintiff, Judge.
26 THE COURT: Are they the transactional lawyers?
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
4
2 MR. BERNSTEIN: No, they're not, Judge. They're
3 litigation counsel.
4 This is Jerry Bernstein speaking.
5 THE COURT: We'll deal with that later.
6 For defendants, everybody from Kasowitz Benson.
7 Again, Mr. Kasowitz are you on?
8 MR. KASOWITZ: I am, your Honor.
9 THE COURT: Are you going to be doing the
10 talking?
11 MR. KASOWITZ: I'll be doing most of it, your
12 Honor.
13 THE COURT: And then who else will be joining in?
14 MR. KASOWITZ: Mr. Marks, Aaron Marks will have
15 some things to say as well.
16 THE COURT: All right. Well, I don't know how
17 much we're going to have to say about anything.
18 First place, this is an interesting case. We've
19 had five motions to admit people pro hac vice and you have
20 had no substantive motions in this case.
21 You have a summons and complaint and you have an
22 answer. You have not done a PC, am I correct?
23 MR. BERNSTEIN: That is correct, your Honor.
24 THE COURT: Well, you know, what you wrote, you
25 outline seven pages for Blank Rome; eight pages for
26 Kasowitz Benson and another five pages in answer and
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
5
2 replies for Blank Rome.
3 If you wanted to bring up these issues, it would
4 have been probably better to have done it either in a PC
5 that you should have had, because this is a 2013 case.
6 We're already halfway -- yeah, we're halfway through 2014.
7 When do you intend to do a PC?
8 Who's talking?
9 MR. BERNSTEIN: This is Jerry Bernstein speaking
10 for the plaintiffs, Judge.
11 We've made our document request back in December
12 at the time we filed a complaint and we've been trying to
13 get documents so we could get moving on this case since
14 then. We finally got our first documents just two days ago
15 before this telephone call. We would like to move this
16 case forward as quickly as we can.
17 THE COURT: You could have done it better if you
18 had done a PC back in January where document production
19 would have been discussed and there would have been time
20 deadlines on it and you would have been in a lot better
21 position. I want you down here for a PC next Tuesday.
22 Let's get going on this case.
23 So, now, I got this seven page -- let me see if I
24 got it right. We have Darabont, all right, who is the
25 screenplay writer for the television series The Walking
26 Dead. My understanding is that AMC Network Entertainment
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
6
2 did two things. Number one, they did the production and
3 then they did the distribution, the licensing distribution
4 portion of it; they did it as one entity.
5 What Darabont is saying to the court is that
6 because they did it as one entity, because it was this
7 vertical integration issue, Darabont believes that they did
8 not get the same amount of money as they would have if they
9 had had the production company Sony or I think we have --
10 we have Sony and we have Lionsgate, as two examples, and
11 that AMC with the product would have then distributed it
12 and there would have been a different legal arrangement,
13 possibly, or nonlegal arrangement.
14 But anyway, it would have ended up, according to
15 Blank Rome, on the part of their client, it would have
16 ended up to be a more profitable return to Darabont than
17 the arrangement that he is working under with AMC at this
18 time.
19 I'm not commenting on whether that's a good idea,
20 bad idea or whether there's anything -- I mean, you know,
21 Kasowitz did not come in with a motion to dismiss, so
22 there's nothing really before me. I know that Kasowitz has
23 said in someplace or another that they intend to do a
24 summary judgment motion. I can't say that my courthouse
25 has barriers in front of it.
26 But, Mr. Kasowitz, you do know that there's one
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
7
2 summary judgment motion, not a partial summary judgment
3 motion, I'll do some now and then later on when we're
4 finished discovery I'll do another summary judgment motion.
5 No. Our rules say one. So if you want to use your summary
6 judgment shot now because you think that that's the way to
7 go, I can't say no to you, but I can say you're not getting
8 a second shot at it. So you may want to think that over.
9 All right. So getting back to where we are, what
10 plaintiff wants as one aspect of the discovery, they want
11 AMC's license agreements with unaffiliated studios, Sony
12 and Lionsgate, with regard to respectively to AMC
13 Productions called Breaking Bad and Madmen. I think
14 Breaking Bad is Sony's and Madmen is Lionsgate.
15 And the reason why they say they want it is
16 because they want to see whether or not the arrangement
17 that came about with independent studios, unaffiliated
18 studios, Sony and Lionsgate, was anything comparable to the
19 arrangement that was put together with AMC being both the
20 producer and also the licensor or the distributor. So that
21 is the reason why they're looking for that information.
22 And I think that I read your papers, your lengthy
23 papers, and I've read over all your arguments and I'm ready
24 to make a decision on that. I consider that based on the
25 complaint and the request in the complaint, I consider the
26 request made by plaintiff to have AMC's license agreements
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
8
2 with unaffiliated studio Sony and Lionsgate as it concerns
3 two events, Breaking Bad and Madmen, I consider that to be
4 a proper discovery request and I'm going to permit
5 documents to be released for that purpose.
6 I understand what the Kasowitz firm has said,
7 that it's really nothing to do with anything, it's
8 totally -- it was totally useless and baseless, it's not a
9 good, et cetera, and all the other good things that were
10 said. But, nevertheless, I consider it to be appropriate
11 information that should be revealed.
12 Wait one second. Two more categories that also
13 have to be addressed, and I will permit, and that is in
14 addition to the comparable programs, there is the issue
15 regarding the production of documents regarding the value
16 of the series to AMC, because there, we will be able to see
17 whether or not -- that also has to go for the other two
18 series, we have to see what the percentage return is and
19 that is something that is complained about, and so I have
20 to permit that in that discovery.
21 Also, the issue, the next issue that was raised
22 by Blank Rome that I think that also has to be disclosed
23 and that is documents concerning the series derivative talk
24 show entitled The Talking Dead. Again, I consider that to
25 be relevant to the value of Walking Dead. So it's all
26 interrelated. The Talking Dead is relevant to the value of
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
9
2 The Walking Dead.
3 And the issue that is really before me is whether
4 or not the screenplay writer is entitled to more money and
5 so these things go to the possible valuation of what is the
6 value of Walking Dead and the other comparable shows. So
7 that's the reason why I'm doing it.
8 All right. Now, we have other issues that we
9 have to talk about and that has to do with the
10 confidentiality order. We have a situation -- what is that
11 noise?
12 MR. KASOWITZ: Your Honor, may I? It's Marc
13 Kasowitz.
14 THE COURT: Yes. Go ahead.
15 MR. KASOWITZ: Well, let me start with the
16 confidentiality order and then if I might be heard --
17 THE COURT: No, no, no, no, sir. I am going to
18 tell you what I am going to say about the confidentiality
19 order, okay, and then you'll tell me.
20 All right. So let's go to the confidentiality --
21 I read your papers. You're not going to say anything more
22 than what you've already written in seven pages or, in your
23 case, eight pages. So, I mean, since you single-spaced
24 eight pages, that's 14 pages, the only thing you did not
25 show me or did not give me is a memorandum of law;
26 otherwise, we have a fully blown and fully done motion in
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
10
2 this particular case.
3 All right. So in terms of the confidentiality
4 order, there is no doubt that we have two situations --
5 three situations. Number one, we have the situation of the
6 individual Darabont represented by Blank Rome. We have the
7 situation of AMC Network Entertainment LLC represented by
8 the Kasowitz firm and by in-house counsel.
9 Then we'll get to the third situation where we
10 have discovery that will be going on with third-party
11 people and as to that we will discuss that in the second
12 phase of my confidentiality order.
13 Now, Blank Rome tells me that Darabont is
14 represented not only by itself, Blank Rome, but also by a
15 transactional law firm that is in charge of Mr. Darabont's
16 contracts and et cetera, et cetera. They say that the
17 transactional law firm should be entitled in the same way
18 as AMC's in-house counsel to review and see all the
19 documents that AMC is producing.
20 I see it completely differently. AMC has it's
21 own in-house counsel. They are AMC's employees. True,
22 they're attorneys, but they're employees, the same way as
23 the engineer is that works for AMC. All right. They
24 are -- I'm sure, they're great lawyers, but they are
25 employees of the firm. So the employees have a right to
26 see everything that the employer is reviewing and doing and
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
11
2 producing and everything else.
3 Kasowitz is the outside litigating firm and,
4 obviously, they're entitled, and both of them as it
5 concerns documents that are being produced by Darabont and
6 by AMC, as to those two entities, they are entitled to both
7 look at them.
8 Darabont is different. Darabont is represented
9 by Blank Rome. The transactional attorney is really the
10 person that creates the contracts and does the transactions
11 that Darabont is going to live by. They are in an entirely
12 different position than in-house counsel at AMC, entirely
13 different position, because they can and they would profit
14 from documents that would be produced by AMC and be able to
15 take advantage to their own personal benefit. That is
16 something that would be wrong because they are not, in a
17 sense, a party to this lawsuit.
18 Different when it comes to third-party documents
19 because there, the third-party documents would be coming
20 from third parties and the only people that should look at
21 third-party documents, because they should not be in a
22 position of benefiting from what the documents says, the
23 only people that should be benefiting should be Blank Rome,
24 as Mr. Darabont's attorneys, and Kasowitz.
25 In that case, AMC's attorneys should not be
26 permitted to look at third-party documents because those
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
12
2 third-party documents may be of interest -- may be of very
3 great importance to the litigation of this matter, but they
4 should not be used to benefit AMC's knowledge of what's
5 going on in the industry, the same way as a transactional
6 attorney should not be able to benefit.
7 However, now we get into the -- I looked over the
8 documents and I see what Blank Rome has produced for me.
9 Let's go to page 9 of the red-line version of this
10 agreement. It's called the Proposed Stipulation and
11 Protective Order for Production and Exchange of
12 Confidential Information.
13 And we go to page 9 and you have to let me know
14 what is blue? Is blue going to be added? And what is this
15 color, this other color -- what's it called -- it would be
16 called brown or orange, something? What is that supposed
17 to be? Does anybody know?
18 MR. BERNSTEIN: Judge, I apologize. I can't lay
19 my hands on that --
20 THE COURT: It's in the back of your first
21 letter.
22 MR. BERNSTEIN: Perhaps Mr. Kinsella or
23 Mr. Liskin have it handy.
24 MR. KINSELLA: And, your Honor, this is Dale
25 Kinsella.
26 We have a black-and-white version, but I'm trying
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
13
2 to procure right now the color version.
3 THE COURT: Well, I can't understand what it is,
4 so I have no idea. Certainly, the little bit I did look at
5 doesn't cover the way I want it written. I want it written
6 this way. I want documents that are being produced
7 in-house by AMC and documents that are being produced by
8 Mr. Darabont, both of which I'm sure have been asked for,
9 those documents, those in-house documents, they can be
10 reviewed by AMC's attorneys and they also can be reviewed
11 by, obviously, the Kasowitz firm. The documents that
12 Mr. Darabont is putting together obviously can be reviewed
13 by Blank Rome. They are not to be reviewed, nor the
14 documents that are turned over by the Kasowitz or AMC
15 people, they are not to be reviewed by the transactional
16 law firm. That's absolutely forbidden and I want it
17 written up that way.
18 Documents that are produced -- this is the second
19 portion of it. Documents that should be -- that are
20 produced by third parties should be labeled "highly
21 confidential" and should be for the attorneys' eyes only.
22 By "attorneys," I mean the attorneys from Blank Rome and
23 the attorneys from Kasowitz, no outside attorneys. In
24 other words, no outside attorneys -- only the outside
25 attorneys can look at it; otherwise, no inside attorneys,
26 no transactional attorneys will be able to look at it for
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
14
2 third-party productions and I think by doing that, it will
3 be an even playing field and it will also be, I think, a
4 good protection for both sides.
5 I must say that I'm sure Blank Rome will come
6 back to me and say, "Gee, Judge, they have all the other
7 attorneys looking at it." Well, no. If Mr. Darabont had
8 been sitting at his kitchen table, somebody that he's using
9 as his own inside person, that, you know, that person would
10 be different, but we don't. We have a transactional
11 attorney on the other side and that I can't permit.
12 So that's my ruling on the confidentiality order.
13 You're going to --
14 MR. BERNSTEIN: Jerry Bernstein from Blank Rome.
15 Just so we're clear, the Kinsella law firm, which
16 is co-counsel with Blank Rome, should also be included
17 among the outside counsel that can view all the documents
18 as well.
19 THE COURT: Well, yes, except that are you -- are
20 you telling me that the Kinsella law firm is definitively
21 not a transactional law firm?
22 MR. BERNSTEIN: That's correct, Judge.
23 THE COURT: Okay. Definitely hired just for the
24 purpose of this litigation?
25 MR. BERNSTEIN: That's correct, Judge.
26 THE COURT: Okay. Well, as long as that's true,
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
15
2 then, yes, Kinsella and Blank Rome can work together and
3 see these documents.
4 And, again, in terms of the third-party documents
5 will be -- those documents will be marked "highly
6 confidential" but will not be seen by the AMC in-house
7 people or the transactional people. Is that clear?
8 MR. BERNSTEIN: It is, Judge.
9 THE COURT: All right. Now, what have I
10 forgotten?
11 MR. BERNSTEIN: Two things, Judge, if I can raise
12 them. Jerry Bernstein again.
13 What time on Tuesday, the 10th, would you like us
14 in court?
15 THE COURT: Hold on a second.
16 I want them to come in for a PC.
17 THE CLERK: Sure.
18 THE COURT: By the way, my PC order that I like
19 is attached to my rules. It's on the court's website, so,
20 you know, maybe if you take a look at it you can have a
21 chance to work on it.
22 THE CLERK: The 17th and the 24th, both
23 available.
24 THE COURT: We don't have anything this coming
25 Tuesday?
26 THE CLERK: This coming sheet the 10th. There
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
16
2 are three PCs on this week, two on next week.
3 THE COURT: All right. I tell you what. I'll
4 relent and we'll have you in, because our schedule is so
5 jam-packed, we'll have you in on the 17th.
6 THE CLERK: 10 o'clock.
7 THE COURT: 10 o'clock.
8 MR. BERNSTEIN: 10 o'clock on the 17th.
9 Judge, this is Jerry Bernstein from Blank Rome.
10 On May 16th, the defendants filed their
11 objections to plaintiffs' first set of interrogatories and
12 essentially their objection is the same -- the same
13 objections as the objection which you already just ruled on
14 with regard to the documents.
15 So I would ask that your Honor rule that with
16 reference to any objections to interrogatories that have
17 the same basis as the objection to the document request,
18 that in that regard the defendants be asked to respond to
19 those interrogatories or those objections be overruled.
20 THE COURT: Yes, but one thing you should be very
21 much aware of and that is that I believe Justice Prudenti,
22 as our Chief Administrative Judge, has approved the new
23 interrogatory language, which limits the amount of
24 interrogatories to 20 and no subparts and really has to do
25 much more than the usual and old-fashioned interrogatories,
26 it has to do with the names of important witnesses and that
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
17
2 kind of interrogatories. You may want to take a look at
3 that new rule.
4 MR. BERNSTEIN: That was not an objection that
5 was made to our interrogatories by the defendants, Judge.
6 MR. KASOWITZ: Your Honor, Mr. Kasowitz.
7 We'll revisit that with the plaintiffs, but may I
8 raise one point which I think may have been lost, your
9 Honor, if you don't mind?
10 THE COURT: Go ahead.
11 MR. KASOWITZ: There is -- your Honor referred to
12 one of the defendants, namely the studio, and, in fact,
13 there are at least two separate defendants. One is the
14 network, AMC Network, and the other is the AMC Studio. And
15 I think that that's an important distinction. I'll do this
16 very, very quickly, your Honor.
17 Your Honor talked about information with respect
18 to value from the defendants and we understand the argument
19 with respect to why the studio, which was in privity with
20 Mr. Darabont and entered into the agreement with
21 Mr. Darabont with respect to The Walking Dead, we
22 understand that argument, we disagree but we understand it.
23 But the network has revenues and values that
24 have, you know, that have nothing specific with respect to
25 The Walking Dead. There's seven days of programming,
26 literally hundreds of different programs, and so values
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
18
2 with respect from the network and information about
3 revenues from the network really are so far beyond the pale
4 here that while we think that -- we certainly will comply
5 with respect to the studio, we would ask your Honor to
6 reconsider the issue with respect to the network.
7 The studio created the program and it was
8 licensed to the network for exhibition, but the network's
9 revenues and the like go far beyond that. And we're
10 delighted to raise this issue with your Honor, if you'd
11 like, on the 17th, but we just think that that is -- and,
12 in fact, your Honor, there's an admission in paragraph 28
13 of the plaintiffs' complaint that the only thing that would
14 be relevant would be revenues from the studio, not from the
15 network.
16 THE COURT: Well, I tell you. This is what we'll
17 do. For the time being, let's concentrate on the studio.
18 However, as this develops -- and you know this is not --
19 discovery is not going to be a day, it's going to be a
20 distance of time. If there is a reason that can be
21 articulated and I decide that we should go beyond just
22 studio to network, then let's see how it develops. That's
23 something that maybe should be taken up when we do the PC.
24 MR. KASOWITZ: Thank you, your Honor.
25 MR. KINSELLA: Your Honor, this is Dale Kinsella
26 from Los Angeles from the Kinsella firm.
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
19
2 THE COURT: Who are you?
3 MR. KINSELLA: This is Dale Kinsella from
4 Kinsella Weitzman.
5 THE COURT: Okay.
6 MR. KINSELLA: May I speak briefly?
7 THE COURT: Yes, go ahead.
8 MR. KINSELLA: I just wanted you to know that
9 there is only one AMC defendant. Notwithstanding what
10 Mr. Kasowitz said, there is only AMC defendant and that
11 defendant is the network. The studio defendant is an
12 entity called Stegall Productions, Inc., which is located
13 in San Diego, California.
14 So what your Honor would be doing, if you agree
15 with what Mr. Kasowitz just said, is basically not giving
16 us any AMC documents. And, very briefly, I can tell you
17 why it is important that we have the network documents. It
18 is the network that pays the license fee to itself, that
19 is, AMC. That is the dominant source of all of the
20 revenues that go into the profit pool.
21 So determining value of documents from the
22 network is absolutely critical to the case and getting
23 documents from a San Diego entity by the name of Stegall
24 Productions, which is the sole studio defendant here, would
25 really not advance this ball very much at all. It is the
26 network documents and the value of Walking Dead to the
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
20
2 network that is critical for purposes of determining what
3 this license fee should have been to Mr. Darabont.
4 MR. KASOWITZ: And, your Honor, Mr. Kasowitz.
5 It's not true that the studio is not a defendant
6 here. There are three AMC defendants here, plus two
7 Stegall Productions, nor is it true that the studio will
8 not be making a production with respect to receipts -- with
9 respect to gross revenues and the like. We have already
10 produced documents that include that and we will be making
11 further production.
12 So we take your Honor's point about the network,
13 considering the network, the broad network down the road,
14 and we will comply, of course, with your Honor's direction
15 with respect to producing relevant materials and responsive
16 ones from the studio, which is a defendant here.
17 THE COURT: Yes, but, Mr. Kasowitz, Mr. Kinsella
18 makes a good point, and since I'm not at all familiar with
19 the relationships between studio and networks and et
20 cetera, what is required, is that that information is
21 divulged on the actual monies made by The Walking Dead,
22 because without that, how can plaintiffs in any way make
23 the argument that, indeed, Mr. Darabont did not get the
24 kind of recompense that he should have gotten for the
25 creation of The Walking Dead.
26 So I am going to change my mind and say that
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
21
2 everything to do with AMC, be it the studio, be it the
3 licensing, be it the top person or the little person, let's
4 get it all out.
5 MR. BERNSTEIN: The network.
6 THE COURT: The network.
7 MR. KASOWITZ: Your Honor, so I understand that,
8 what you mean is --
9 THE COURT: Who's that?
10 MR. KASOWITZ: It's Mr. Kasowitz. I'm sorry.
11 What you mean is in so far as it concerns The
12 Walking Dead.
13 THE COURT: Yes, well, of course. I'm not asking
14 you to tell me how AMC is doing, not that I ever watched
15 AMC, I don't think, but anyway, whatever else they do.
16 MR. KASOWITZ: But, your Honor, the advertising
17 fees and subscriber fees and the like have nothing to do
18 with Mr. Darabont at all --
19 THE COURT: No. My understanding of these papers
20 is that's not true.
21 MR. KASOWITZ: -- with the value that he's
22 subscribing to his contract here, that is the point, and
23 that is why we are prepared, and I think your Honor was
24 right in limiting the production to the studio, and we're
25 not looking to avoid the gross receipts that will have been
26 made by the studio with respect to The Walking Dead. All
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
22
2 of that, all of that will be produced.
3 THE COURT: Mr. Kasowitz --
4 MR. KASOWITZ: These other --
5 THE COURT: Mr. Kasowitz.
6 MR. KASOWITZ: -- these other means of income are
7 far afield here, your Honor.
8 THE COURT: Mr. Kasowitz, let's put it this way.
9 The issue has to do with The Walking Dead. I don't care if
10 the revenue or the income or advertising involves The
11 Walking Dead or it involves -- I want everything. I want
12 everything as it concerns The Walking Dead. That's the
13 only fair way. There's no way -- you can't parse it out
14 until you see it all.
15 But you're right --
16 MR. BERNSTEIN: This is Jerry Bernstein, the
17 plaintiffs.
18 It's not just The Walking Dead, that they're
19 going to give us. It's the other shows. It's Breaking
20 Bad.
21 THE COURT: Yes, yes, I understand. That I
22 already ordered, Breaking Bad and the two shows. What are
23 they called?
24 MR. BERNSTEIN: Breaking Bad, Madmen and Talking
25 Dead and it should be everything from the network because
26 that's where the money is.
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
23
2 THE COURT: Okay.
3 MR. KASOWITZ: That's not true that that's where
4 the money is. The studio is the one that creates these
5 programs and that is the source of income --
6 THE COURT: No, sir. Mr. Kasowitz, even I know
7 better than that. I want all information from whatever
8 source as it concerns The Walking Dead, The Talking Dead,
9 Breaking Bad and Madmen -- is that clear -- from all
10 sources, network, studio, in between, advertisements,
11 everything, because that's the only way you're going to be
12 able to do a comparable and a comparable is what they're
13 going to be basing the damages on. So that's what we're
14 talking about.
15 Anyway, one last thing before we sign off, and
16 that is this has been on the record, the entire thing has
17 been on the record because I always talk on the record, and
18 I'm going to need a copy of the minutes of this. So you
19 want to contact Debra Lynn Salzman, S-A-L-Z-M-A-N. She's a
20 registered merit reporter and her direct dial number is
21 (646)386-3104.
22 MR. BERLINSKI: Your Honor, this is John
23 Berlinski from Kasowitz, if I could have just one quick
24 comment.
25 The issue here is not that the revenue doesn't
26 come in on both the network and studio sides. The issue is
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
24
2 that the plaintiffs have admitted in their own complaint
3 that the only revenues that are relevant to this dispute
4 are the revenues that come in from the studio.
5 What they say, and I quote, in paragraph 28 of
6 their complaint is that "Darabont is entitled under this
7 agreement to a share of profits based on a percentage of a
8 pool of funds known as modified adjusted gross receipts."
9 And then they say, "Essentially gross receipts the studio
10 receives minus production costs and certain deductions."
11 What they have admitted in their own complaint
12 that none of the revenues that went into the network are
13 relevant to this dispute; it is only about the studio.
14 THE COURT: Yes, but wait a second. Wait a
15 second. Wait a second.
16 In order for plaintiff to figure out whether AMC
17 deliberately low-balled all these figures, that's why all
18 of the financial information concerning The Walking Dead,
19 The Talking Dead, and the other two shows, Breaking Bad and
20 Madmen, must be completely revealed. That's the only way
21 you can make that argument.
22 Furthermore, there's one last thing to be said.
23 That if, indeed, the complaint that they're working under
24 right now turns out to be something that needs to be
25 amended to include a broader definition, that can always be
26 done. It can be done up until the day of trial and, in
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r
1 Proceedings
25
2 fact, even after trial. So voila! Those are my rulings.
3 Please make sure I get a copy of the minutes so that I have
4 a copy of what I did and I want to wish everybody a nice
5 weekend.
6 MR. KASOWITZ: Thank you, Judge. We'll see you
7 on the 17th.
8 THE COURT: Right. Bye-bye.
9 (Telephonic proceedings concluded.)
10 * * *
11 C E R T I F I C A T E
12 I, Debra Lynn Salzman, RMR, an Official
13 Court Reporter of the State of New York, do hereby
14 certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate
15 transcript of my stenographic notes.
16
17 __________________________
18 Debra Lynn Salzman, RMR
Official Court Reporter
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
D e b r a S a l z m a n , O f f i c i a l C o u r t R e p o r t e r