The opinion
ocr Three Bryant Park
h e rt DOCUMENT 1095 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-6797
HL ELECTRONICALLY FILED Me ork AY aes
DOC #: +1 212 698 3599 Fax
DATE FILED: 01/02/2025 www.dechert.com
ANDREW LEVANDER
Andrew.Levander@dechert.com
+1 212 698 3683 Direct
December 26, 2024 +1 212 698 0483 Fax
Honorable Margaret M. Garnett
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
40 Foley Square, Room 2102
New York, NY 10007
Re: fuboTV Inc. v. The Walt Disney Company, No. 1:24-cv-01363-MMG
Dear Judge Garnett:
I write on behalf of Defendants Fox Corporation (“Fox”) and Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc.
(“WBD”). The Parties have met and conferred regarding the unsealing of the transcript from the
December 13, 2024 hearing. Attached as Exhibit A are the portions of the transcript that
Defendants respectfully request that the Court order sealed. No Party has raised any objections,
and Plaintiffs fuboTV Inc. and fuboTV Media Inc. take no position on these redactions.
In ruling on a motion to seal, the Second Circuit has recognized that the right to public access to
judicial documents is not absolute and that “the court must balance competing considerations
against it.” Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 120 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal
quotation marks and citations omitted). In particular, the Court must balance the right to public
access to judicial documents against the privacy interest of the party or parties resisting disclosure.
See id. at 119-20. This Court has followed that approach in this case to seal information regarding
“confidential terms of competitively sensitive contracts.” Dkt. No. 295 at 1. Indeed, it has granted
the Parties’ sealing motions for the legal memoranda that were filed with the Court prior to the
December 13 hearing. See Dec. 13 Hearing Tr. at 3-5.
Like those memoranda, the December 13 transcript quotes and refers to confidential terms from
competitively sensitive contracts. To maintain the confidentiality of those terms, defendants Fox
and WBD seek to redact limited portions of the public transcript. Disclosure of such terms would
provide competitors unfair insight into the Parties’ contracting practices and allow those
competitors to use that knowledge to adjust their negotiating strategy, thereby harming the Parties’
competitive standing. These proposed redactions are “narrowly tailored to protect the business
interests of the parties while providing sufficient public access” to the transcript. [d. at 5.
For these reasons, Defendants respectfully request that the Court maintain the portions of the
transcript designated in Exhibit A under seal.
ch eC rt December 26, 2024
Page 2
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Andrew J. Levander
Andrew J. Levander
cc: All counsel of record (VIA ECF)
GRANTED. The portions of the transcript counsel for Fox and Warner Bros. Discovery
request to be kept under seal and in redacted form contain highly commercially sensitive and
confidential business information including, for example, confidential terms of competitively
sensitive contracts. The Court finds that sealing these portions is sufficiently narrowly
tailored to both protect the business interests of the parties as well as provide appropriate
public access to judicial documents. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d
110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006). The proposed redactions indicated in Exhibit A, and as
confirmed by counsel for Fox and Warner Brothers Discovery via email with Chambers, are
therefore hereby SO ORDERED. The Court will convey the redactions, as confirmed by
counsel, to the S.D.N.Y. Court Reporters to apply the sealing as directed herein.
SO ORDERED. Dated January 2, 2025.
2 7
HON. aos RETM. GARNETT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Exhibit A
suboTV, Inc., et al. v. The Walt Disney Company, et al.
Case No.: 24-cv-01363-MMG
Defendants’ Proposed Confidentiality Redactions
December 13, 2024 Hearing Transcript
Defendants’ Proposed Redactions
Defendants’ Proposed Redactions
Defendants’ Proposed Redactions