The Bob Dylan James Damiano

index

bobdylan

The basic contents of this website has been posted on the world wide web since December 1996.

Please note: There is audio-content on this website so you may have to "turn on" your speakers.

Thank You

This website is updated daily although this site contains a great deal of information please note that we are still adding

documents and information daily.

We have also not included the two hour DVD "Dignity due to the fact that all videotaped depositions on the

DVD have been designated "Confidential" by United States District Court Judge Joel B. Rosen. These depositionsconclusivly and decisively incriminate Bob Dylan

"Eleven Years"

James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan / Copyright Infringement CV 95-4795 (JBS) Judge

Jerome B. Simandle presiding.

The Bob Dylan James Damiano Story http://jamesdamiano.yolasite.com/

1 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Judge Simandle

Judge Joel B. Rosen magistrate.

Judge Rosen

Bob Dylan Retains Same Law Firm as George W. Bush in Fifteen Year Plagiarism Law Suit. Also suppresses Plaintiff’s

First Amendment Rights acquiring a protective order designating all video taped depositions that are incriminating to

Dylan confidential

Bob Dylan & his law firm acquired a confidentiality order in a fifteen year plagiarism law suit designating all discoverymaterials including fifty hours of incriminating video taped depositions as confidential suppressing Plaintiff James

Damiano’s first amendment rights to warn the public of Judicial favoritism and corruption.

Camden NJ June 2, 2009 -Few artists can lay claim to the controversy that has surrounded the career of songwriterJames Damiano. Twenty-two years ago James Damiano began an odyssey that led him into a legal maelstrom with Bob

Dylan that, to this day, fascinates the greatest of intellectual minds.

As the curtain rises on the stage of deceit we learn that CBS used songs and lyrics for international recording artist, Bob

Dylan. Bob Dylan’s name is credited to the songs. One of those songs is nominated for a Grammy as best rock song of theyear. Ironically the title of that song is Dignity.

Since auditioning for the legendary CBS Record producer John Hammond, Sr., who influenced the careers of music

industry icons Billy Holiday, Bob Dylan, Pete Seger, Bruce Springsteen and Stevie Ray Vaughan, James has engaged in amultimillion dollar copyright infringement law suit with Bob Dylan.

As per court papers it is judicially uncontested by Bob Dylan and or Bob Dylan’s law firms Manatt, Phelps & Phillips ,

Parcher Hayes & Snyder, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, Heck Brown and Sherry and Sony House Counsel that Bob Dylan

and people in Bob Dylan’s entourage have solicited James Damiano’s songs and music for over ten years and elevenmonths.

Interestingly enough Judge Jerome B. Simandle decided “This court will accept as true Plaintiff’s allegations that Sony

represented to him that he would be credited and compensated for his work if Dylan used it. Judge Simandle also stated

in his decision “Plaintiff has demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendants had access to hiswork.

All statements, facts and documents in this declaration have been submitted to Bob Dylan, his counsel and to the court.

Bob Dylan's attorney's have also downloaded the contents of this website and produced it to the Court, specifically to TheHonorable Judge Jerome B. Simandle.


2 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

All statements, facts, and documents in this declaration have been unanswered and uncontested by Bob Dylan and hiscounsel.

After fourteen years of litigation, ten thousand pages written, fifty hours of video taped depositionwhich are incriminating to Bob Dylan and after at least seven and a half million dollars have been spent on this

litigation, Bob Dylan still to this date has not filed a counter or slander suit against James Damiano

Said mentioned materials and documents have been submitted to the United States Marshalls who have commented in

James Damiano's favor stating that the case was a "Shut tight case that should have been won by Damiano" The United

States Marshall Service is represented by the United States Attorney's office who's is headed by the Attorney General ofthe United States.

It is uncontested by Bob Dylan and or Bob Dylan's law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips formerly (Parcher Hayes &

Snyder) and Gibson Dunn & Crutcher that Bob Dylan and people in Bob Dylan's entourage have solicited James

Damiano's songs and music for over ten years.

The Bob Dylan James Damiano Story is the most covered up scandal in the history of Rock and roll

At the 1995 Grammy awards "Dignity" was nominated for a Grammy as the best Rock song of the year.

According to Bob Dylan's attorney Orin Snyder James Damiano's website has been viewed over 1,400,000 times. Mr.Snyder has downloaded the website with the stat counter viewable and produced it to Judge Simandle three times, yet

never filed criminal chages of any kind..

It has been published in the media that the integrity of the United States Federal Judicial System has diminished to the

level that it is unable to adjudicate a simple copyright infringement lawsuit. This motion not only supports that allegation

it conclusively documents, to the record the validity of said statement.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST Bob Dylan received an Honorary Doctorate from Princeton University in 1971, The same

University Judge Simandle received a B.S.E degree at.

See below

The Honorable Judge Jerome B. Simandle

Born 1949 in Binghamton, NY

Federal Judicial Service:


3 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

U. S. District Court, District of New Jersey

Nominated by George H.W. Bush on April 1, 1992, to a new seat created by 104

Stat. 5089; Confirmed by the Senate on May 21, 1992, and received commission

on May 26, 1992.

Education:

Princeton University, B.S.E., 1971

University of Stockholm, Sweden, Dipl. Soc Sci, 1975

University of Pennsylvania Law School, J.D., 1976

Professional Career:

Law clerk, Hon. John F. Gerry, U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey,

1976-1978

Assistant U.S. attorney, District of New Jersey, 1978-1983

Attorney in charge of Trenton office, 1982-1983

U.S. Magistrate, U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, 1983-

1992

Race or Ethnicity: White

Gender: Male

In a span of seven years from 1990 to 1997 Bob Dylan released only one newly written original song titled "Dignity". Mr.

Dylan's seven year hiatus from writing original material lacks merit of performance and creativity. One must wonder

why Mr. Dylan would embrace the hubris that time can endorse

This lawsuit James Damiano vs Bob Dylan for copyright infringement was filed in Federal Court in November of 1995.

This website was has been published on the world wide internet for a period of more than thirteen years since January of

1996.

The most interesting and shocking fact about this website is that Bob Dylan has tried to suppress the truth and the facts of

this case by applying to the court for a confidentiality order designating all discovery materials as confidential.

Suppression of the truth as far as we can remember is a tactic often used in Communism.

James Damiano subpoenaed Bob Dylan for his November 11th 1999 hearing and Bob Dylan never appeared in court.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY JAMES DAMIANO

VS.

CV95-4795 (JBS)

BOB DYLAN. ET AL

NOTICE TO APPEAR


4 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

VIA FAX AND MOTION

Please take notice that plaintiff, James Damiano shall subpoena Bob Dylan on November 11, 1999 at 1:30 PM, at One

John F Gerry Plaza, Camden New Jersey, 08010 to testify in the above case.

Subpoena attached. James Damiano___________

Dated 11/11/99

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

James Damiano certifies that he served the foregoing notice to appear to Steven D. Johnson counsel for Bob Dylan.

James Damiano____________________________


DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

JAMES DAMIANO, Plaintiff C 95-4795 (JBS)

against

SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC DATED 10/17/2002

and BOB DYLAN Defendants

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REVERSE JUDGE JEROME B. SIMANDLE'S DISMISSAL OF THIS LAWSUIT.

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REVERSE JUDGE JEROME B. SIMANDLE'S MEMORANDUM OPINION OFFINDING JAMES DAMIANO IN CONTEMPT FOR VIOLATIONS OF JUDGE JOEL B. ROSIN'S

[Sic]CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO VACATE [Sic] PROTECTIVE ORDER

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ADMISSIONS OF DEFENDANTS

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR THE RECUSAL OF JUDGE SIMANDLE

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT AGAINST SONY ENTERTAINMENT INC. AND BOB DYLAN.

At the 1995 Grammy awards "Dignity" was nominated for a Grammy as the best Rock song of the year and it is estimated

that it made over $90,000,000.00 in the United States alone.

In 1994 James Damiano advertised in the attorney wanted section of the New York times for an attorney to file acopyright infringement lawsuit against Bob Dylan. The advertisement read "Attorney wanted to file a copyright

infringement lawsuit against the worlds most respected songwriter"

Steven M. Kramer answered the advertisement along with many other attorneys.

A CD Rom of this motion and a four-hour videotape of segments of various depositions taken during discovery have beenproduced to the United States Marshall's Service. After reviewing plaintiff's materials The United States Marshall's

Service commented in Plaintiff James Damiano's favor, stating that Damiano's case was a "shut tight case" that he (James

Damiano) should have won.

This lawsuit was never dismissed with prejudice.

Racism

A diversion of reality

That the worst segregation


5 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

In the world today

Is not between

Yellow, red, black or white men

Muslims Jews or Christians

But between

The rich and the poor

Damiano 04 copyright

James Damiano

All poetry and lyrics on this site have been written by James Damiano

and copyrighted with the library of congress

Someday maybe

You'll be able

To tell

The greatest story

Say the greatest line

Give the greatest

Performance

Find the greatest

Find copyright damiano 92"

The basic contents of this website has been posted on the world wide web since December 1996.

The most recent activity in this litigation is the following letter sent to litigants by Judge Simandle on December 23 2002.Mr. Snyder (Mr. Orin Snyder Esq.) of Parcher Hayes & Snyder represents Bob Dylan in this action.


District of New Jersey

UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE CHAMBER OF JEROME B. SIMANDLE

DISTRICT JUDGE

ONE JOHN F. GERRY PLAZA

PO BOX 888

CAMDEN NJ 08010


6 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

(856) 757-5167

December 23, 2002

ORIN SNYDER, ESQUIRE

PARCHER HAYES & SNYDER

500 Fifth Avenue

New York, NY 10110

STEVEN D. JOHNSON, ESQUIRE

HECKER BROWN SHERRY AND JOHNSON LLP

1700 Two Logan Square

18th and Arch Streets

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2769

Mr. James Damiano

Route

NJ 0780

RE: Damiano v. Bob Dylan & Sony Music Entertainment Inc.

Civil No. 95-4795 (JBS)

Dear Litigants:

This will reply to Mr. Snyder's letter of December 18, 2002, which requests an extension of time to respond to Mr.

Damiano's motions from December 20, 2002 until January 20, 2003.

Under the circumstances in Mr. Snyder's letter, his request is granted. In my preliminary review of these motions, I have

noted that they do not conform to the requirements of the Federal motions, and that the 40-page limit for motions has alsobeen exceeded.

Notwithstanding the procedural defects in the motions, and in light of Mr. Damiano's pro se status, I will not dismiss themotions and require rebriefing. as I would do if an attorney filed these papers.

I will, however limit the length of defendants' opposition to the 40-page limit of L. Civ. R. 7.2, and request that specialattention be given to the motion to vacate the protective order. That motion may not be timely to the extent that it seeks

relief from an ongoing injunctive order regarding the use of confidential discovery materials. Although the defendants

must address all of the pending motions, I would appreciate if special attention is given by defense counsel and by Mr.Damiano to the current status of the confidentiality order.

The issue arises whether, with the passage of time, the protected materials will continue to have the heightened degree ofconfidentiality which they were found to enjoy in earlier years. If not, is the future continuation of the injunction against

use of the confidential materials warranted? In other words, Mr. Damiano has asked that the court re-examine the

continued validity of the protective order against his use of confidential discovery materials, and the court is willing to doso after all parties have had a chance to be heard.

In summary, all motions remain pending, and the defendants' opposition will be due January 20, 2003. Mr. Damiano'sreply papers, if any are due 14 days after receiving defendants' opposition papers. Mr. Damiano's reply is also limited by

L. Civ. R. 7.2(b) to 15 pages. After all submissions have been received by the court, I will determine whether or not to

grant Mr. Damiano's recusal motion and, if recusal is denied, whether to convene oral argument or decide the matterupon the basis of the papers received under Rule 78. Fed. R. Civ. P.


7 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Very Truly yours,

JEROME B. SIMANDLE U.S. District Judge

JBS/mm cc: Steven D. Johnson, Esquire 900 Haddon Avenue, Suite 412 Collingswood, NJ 08108-1903

Update 9/12/03 Judge Jeorme B. Simandle has ruled. To inquire about Judge Simandle's Sept 12 2003 opinion send e-mail

to the e-mail address below:

[email protected]

Judge Simandle disregarded a musical analysis of a song released by Bob Dylan titled "Dignity" constructed by Dr.Greene who graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University Even though Judge Simandle has no musical

background.

A copy of Doctor

Greene's resume is displayed below


8 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

All documents and statements contained in this document have been produced to defendants during discovery.

This website documents the corruption and fraud committed by Federal District Court Judge Jerome B Simandle as per

Rule 56 (c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

A court may grant summary judgment only when the materials of record "show that there is no genuine issue as to any

material fact Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)."

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

VII. JUDGMENT Rule 56. Summary Judgment

(C) Copyright Damiano 1988

This website also documents the corruption and fraud committed by Orin Snyder Esq. of Parcher, Hayes & Snyder and

Steven D. Johnson Esq. of Hecker, Brown, Sherry & Johnson.





9 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

against



PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REVERSE JUDGE JEROME B. SIMANDLE'S DISMISSAL OF THIS LAWSUIT.

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REVERSE JUDGE JEROME B. SIMANDLE'S MEMORANDUM OPINION OFFINDING JAMES DAMIANO IN CONTEMPT FOR VIOLATIONS OF JUDGE JOEL B. ROSIN'S

[Sic]CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO VACATE [Sic] PROTECTIVE ORDER

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ADMISSIONS OF DEFENDANTS

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR THE RECUSAL OF JUDGE SIMANDLE

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT AGAINST SONY ENTERTAINMENT INC. AND BOB DYLAN.

At the 1995 Grammy awards "Dignity" was nominated for a Grammy as the best Rock song of the year.

At a time when public confidents, in our court system seem to be at an all time low, it has been published in the media that

the integrity of the United States Federal Judicial System has diminished to the level that it is unable to adjudicate a

simple copyright infringement lawsuit.

This motion not only supports that allegation it conclusively documents, to the record the validity of the statement.


against



DECLARATION OF JAMES DAMIANO #1

James Damiano pursuant to U.S.C. Section 1746, declares under penalty of perjury that:

1. The materials facts contained within this motion conclusively, refute this courts decision to enter summary judgment in

favor of defendant Bob Dylan as pursuant to Rule 56 ( c ) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

2. In all major decisions of this litigation, this court continuously chose to honor the opinion of Bob Dylan's counsel Orin

Snyder as opposed to plaintiff Damiano's true material facts.

3. This motion is based on part, and in light of that all decisions made by this Court in favor of Bob Dylan, were based on

the opinion of Bob Dylan's attorney Orin Snyder and that these opinions were held as truth over plaintiff's true material

facts, which conclusively reveal the opposite of Judge Simandle's findings.

4. This motion documents to the record the obvious and blatant validity of plaintiff's allegations.

5. This motion read in its entirety lawfully exonerates plaintiff, (James Damiano) from all judgments, rulings and

decisions arriving from this lawsuit.

6. This motion is lawfully conclusive in deciding that Judge Simandle's decision to dismiss this lawsuit is unlawful, illegal,

adverse to and inconsistent with the facts of this case.

7. That all statements contained in this motion are true.

EXECUTED ON THIS _______ DAY OF __________YEAR OF 2002 IN________________________________________________________________________________________________ James Damiano

_________________________


10 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

This lawsuit James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan for copyright infringement, Civil # 95-4795 (JBS), was dismissed unlawfully as

per basic civil rule procedure 56 (c) FRCP (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) by The Honorable Judge Jerome B.Simandle (Federal Court Camden, District of New Jersey).

New evidence, which is pertinent to the outcome of this lawsuit, has been released in the media whereby plaintiff hasbecome aware of allegations that Bob Dylan's attorney Orin Snyder and Jonathan Liebman have been accused of

falsifying evidence and lying in the Selletti Vs. Carey lawsuit.


DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY JAMES DAMIANO, Plaintiff C 95-4795 (JBS)

against



MOTION FOR ADMISSIONS FRCP rule 36 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 36

The facts expressed within this motion will be conclusively deemed as truth within 30 days of August 3, 2000, should theybe left disproved by Defendants Bob Dylan and or Sony Music Entertainment Inc. or by any other party involved or not

involved in this matter as, pursuant to FRCP rule 36. At such time said admissions and facts expressed within this motion

will be deemed as truth, entered upon the record of this court and docketed with the clerk.

The fact issues expressed within this motion concerning Defendants eleven year association with Plaintiff and all fact

issues expressed within this motion concerning defendant Bob Dylan's solicitation of Plaintiff James Damiano's songs, willbe deemed admitted and acknowledged as truth after thirty days unless defendants deny and contest the forgoing with

specificity, pursuant to FRCP rule 36.


Plaintiff stipulates that he has produced to the court this same motion for admissions during his contempt hearing, atwhich time it was entered upon the record of this court as per order of Judge Simandle as exhibit A. and that defendant's

Bob Dylan and or Sony Music have never answered or denied the motion.

EXECUTED ON THIS _______ DAY OF ____________________YEAR OF 2002 IN

_________________________________________________________

James Damiano ____________________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY


against


and BOB DYLAN Defendants DECLARATION OF JAMES DAMIANO #2 .


1. No unbiased facts, no unbiased evidence or no unbiased testimony exists to support Judge Jerome B. Simandle'sdecision to dismiss Plaintiff James Damiano's lawsuit against Bob Dylan for copyright infringement case Number CV 95-

4795 (JBS).

2. The United States District Court District of New Jersey has disregarded eleven years of material facts regarding Bob

Dylan's solicitation of James Damiano's songs and has granted summary judgment dismissing all counts of this lawsuit to

Defendant Bob Dylan in violation of Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).

3. That all statements contained in this motion are true and correct.


11 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

4. This document motion 321 standard size pages. Text size is 12, 14 to16 size on headings in IBM compatible Microsoft

word pad document


_________________________________________________________

James Damiano ____________________________________

A CD Rom of this motion and a four-hour videotape of segments of various depositions taken during discovery have been

produced to the United States Marshall's Service. After reviewing plaintiff's materials The United States Marshall's

Service commented in Plaintiff James Damiano's favor, stating that Damiano's case was a "shut tight case" that he shouldhave won.

A four episode movie about this litigation has been completed. The movie contains video taped depositions, music videosand assorted segments pertainning to this litigation.

From United States District Judge. JEROME B. SIMANDLE OPINION: [*625] JAMES DAMIANO Vs. Bob Dylan CV

95-4795 (JBS)

Judge Simadle cited rule 56( c )

A court may grant summary judgment only when the materials of record "show that there is no genuine issue as to any

material fact Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)."

[Emphasis added] "no genuine issue as to any material fact."

Judge Simandle also found that James Damiano has created a genuine issue of material fact.

"Plaintiff asserts that 'the bulk of his life's work' was submitted to Sony beginning in 1982.(Complaint. At 2) He also

alleges that he was told to bring his songs to several concerts which he attended courtesy of Sony. Plaintiff has producedevidence that after these concerts, he was allowed backstage and gave his work to Dylan or his agents. (Damiano

Declaration. At 2, 5, ; Deposition of Pam Damiano at 77-84, 97-104: Deposition of Brad Wright at 105-112). "Taking these

allegations as true, plaintiff has demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendants had access to hiswork."

"Plaintiff has demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact"

A comparison of Judge Simandle's ruling:

"Plaintiff has demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendants had access to his work".

"A court may grant summary judgment only when the materials of record 'show that there is no genuine issue as to any

material fact Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).' "

Exhibit A



CV 95-4795 (JBS

JAMES DAMIANO, Plaintiff

against

SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC and BOB DYLAN Defendants

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT AGAINST BOB DYLAN, MOTION TO RECUSE THE HONORABLE

JUDGE JEROME B. SIMANDLE, MOTION TO REVERSE ALL RULINGS IN THIS LITIGATION, MOTION TO

VACATE PROTECTIVE CONFIDENTIAL ORDERS ENTERED IN THIS LITIGATION , MOTION FORADMISSIONS OF DEFENDANTS BOB DYLAN AND SONY MUSIC INC, MOTION TO REVERSE JUDGE

SIMANDLE'S DISMISSAL


12 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

After thirteen years, fifty hours of incriminating video taped depositions, blatant admissions by defendants and after at

least five and a half million dollars have been spent on this litigation there has not been a counter-suit filed by Bob Dylanand or Sony Music Entertainment.

Plaintiff's website declaration containing the enclosed issues of facts cited in this document has been posted on the worldwide internet for six years and nine months and defendants still to this date, March 29th, 2003 have not contested the

issues of fact or the issues of solicitation by defendants of plaintiffs songs cited herein.

Defendants did however filed a motion for contempt against plaintiff for violating Judge Joel B. Rosen's order designating

all discovery as confidential, including expert testimony, and deposition transcripts.

All witness's in this litigation were sworn to tell the truth. The truth is a perfect defense for libel. It is impossible to

exploit the truth.

This court should know that Plaintiff has been counseled by many attorney's and some Judges who believe that the

outcome of this lawsuit so far is unjust and as a matter of law and at the very least the unresolved issues of facts could

have only been decided by a jury.

DECLARATION OF JAMES DAMIANO #2.


No unbias facts, no unbias evidence or no unbias testimony exists to support Judge Jerome B. Simandle's decision to

dismiss Plaintiff James Damiano's lawsuit against Bob Dylan for copyright infringement case no 95- 4795 (JBS).


___________________________________________________________ James Damiano____________________________________

CERTIFICATION OF JAMES DAMIANO SEPT 29 2000

Dated September 29, 2000

This motion conclusively refutes the courts decision to enter summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

This motion also conclusively refutes the foundation of defendants bias, fabricated, primary defense that Plaintiff wasdelusional and documents to the record that Defendants have intentionally made false statements to this court.

There are issues of facts left unresolved after the courts dismissal.

The decision of Judge Simandle to dismiss this lawsuit is subjective.

This court is attempting to hide from the public, deposition materials which incriminate Bob Dylan.

An Example of this would be Elliot Mintz Bob Dylan's publicist of ten years testified under oath in a video tapeddeposition when deposed by Plaintiff's attorney:

"Under the subject of mis-truths spoken to your client during the course of these telephone conversations he wouldfrequently ask me to pass along information, ask questions about Bob or to Bob about him and in fact told him that I

would and that I did ond on those occasions that of course was a mistruth."

Judge Simandle ignored this admission.

The primary Defendant in this litigation ( Bob Dylan ) refuses to take a deposition.

The primary Defendant in this litigation ( Bob Dylan ) never submitted an affidavit of denial or an affidavit addressing the

unresolved issues cited herein.

Plaintiff's Motion for Request for admissions:

Plaintiff stipulates that the facts expressed within this motion will be conclusively deemed as truth within 30 days of

August 3, 2000, should they be left disproved by anyone. At such time said admissions and facts expressed within this


13 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

motion will be deemed as truth, entered upon the record of this court and docketed with the clerk.

The fact issues expressed within this motion concerning Defendants eleven year association with Plaintiff and all factissues expressed within this motion concerning Defendants solicitation of Plaintiff James Damiano's songs, will be deemed

admitted after thirty days unless defendants deny the forgoing with specificity. pursuant to FRDCP rule 36.

OPINION OVER FACT

a. In all major decisions in this litigation, this court continuously chose as truth the opinion of Defendant's counsel asopposed to Plaintiff's true material facts.

This motion is based on part, in light of that all decisions made by this court in favor of the Defendants, were based onopinion only and that these opinions were held as truth over Plaintiff's true material facts which conclusively reveal the

opposite of these findings.

Plaintiff's material facts substantiate the error within this injustice. Although said facts are massive, almost to many to

cite Plaintiff will notify this court that there are indeed many other facts than what are presented here, which were

produced to defendants during discovery, but for fear of submitting an oversized brief Plaintiff did not submit them.

Plaintiff hereby reserves the right to enter upon the record other findings of fact not cited in this motion. Should thiscourt provide an extension of time to allow Plaintiff to construct a more extensive brief Plaintiff is willing to comply.

Said decisions in 1a. were detrimental to the outcome of this law suit by which the evidence provided herein,acknowledged and upon consideration of this court, conclusively constitute reversible error, and judicially defeat

summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

With the recent development of the internet new finding of facts have surfaced regarding the truthfulness of defendants

defense in this action.

DEFENDANTS TRY TO MAINTAIN TO THE COURT THAT THE PEOPLE AT CBS RECORDS / SONY MUSIC

WHO WERE IN POSSESSION OF JAMES DAMIANO'S SONGS, WERE NOT IN ANY POSITION TO ADVANCE

PLAINTIFFS CAREER AS A SONGWRITER IN THE MUSIC INDUSTRY.

James Damiano pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1746, declares under penalty of perjury that:

1979

Years ago I read an unauthorized biography about Bob Dylan, in which the author made reference to a man who at onetime was considered to be the president of CBS Records. His name was John Hammond, Sr. He was family to the

Vanderbilts, Attended Yale law school, the most sought after record producer in the United States, and had signed Pete

Seeger to Columbia Records 1960.

In fact John Hammond Sr. was and probably will always be considered the most influential music executive in the world

by music industry professionals.

After years of working in the music industry, Mr. Hammond established himself as a legend and accomplished a

reputation as having the best ears in the business by signing a fascinating number of legendary artists to the record world.


14 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Artists like Billy Holiday, Count Basie, Charlie Christian, Duke Ellington, Aretha Franklin, George Benson, Bob Dylan,

Bruce Springsteen along with many other artists including Stevie Ray Vaughan were John Hammond affiliates.

Bob Dylan and John Hammond Sr.

An article downloaded from the internet is displayed below about Mr. Hammond.

http://www.bluespower.com/a-mb.htm

Major talent scout, John Hammond Sir brought Stevie Ray Vaughan, Bob Dylan, Aretha Franklin, Leonard Cohen and

Bruce Springsteen to Columbia Records. Hammond also worked as a producer with such early greats as Bessie Smith,Billie Holiday, Benny Goodman and Count Basie

Inspired by the book I read, I decided to take a long shot and called CBS Records on the phone. The operator answeredand I asked to be put through to John Hammond's office. The receptionist rang his office and a woman named Mikie

Harris answered the phone.

Mikie Harris

Mikie Harris I told Mikie that I was a lyricist and asked her if she had a few seconds to listen to one lyric. She replied yesby saying "Shoot." I then recited a lyric to her that I had recently written and said "the lyric is: Just think how beautiful

you'd feel if you knew your love was real." Within a few seconds I could tell Mikie liked the lyric.

I in turn did not want to push to hard on the first phone call fearing that I might put her behind schedule, so I tried toinch my way out of the conversation politely while trying not to show my emotions but before the conversation ended

between Mikie and me, she made it explicit that she wanted me to call again. She repeatedly told me to feel free to call

her there at the office. So began a relationship where we would converse through actual meetings or correspond over thephone, that lasted close to seven and a half years.

Mikie told me that her name would be appearing in the credits on Stevie Ray Vaughan's album that was released in 1983.When the album was released it listed John Hammond Sr. As Executive producer and Mikie Harris as associate

producer .

Credits were given to Mikie Harris on Stevie Ray vaughan albums: Assistant to Executive Producer: Mikie Harris

1. Say What! - S.R. Vaughan - 2. Lookin' Out The Window - D. Bramhall - 3. Look At Little Sister - H. Ballard - 4. Ain't


15 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Gone `N' Give Up On Love - S.R. Vaughan - 5. Gone Home - E. Harris - 6. Change It - D. Bramhall - 7. You'll Be Mine -

W. Dixon - 8. Empty Arms - S.R. Vaughan - 9. Come On (Part III) - E. King - 10. Life Without You - S.R. Vaughan - 11.

SRV Speaks 12. Little Wing/Third Stone From The Sun - J. Hendrix - 13. Slip Slidin' Slim - S.R. Vaughan - Stevie RayVaughan: guitar/vocals Chris "Whipper" Layton: drums Tommy Shannon: bass Reese Wynans: keyboards Joe Sublett:

saxophone Produced by Stevie Ray Vaughan/Double Trouble and Richard Mullen Executive Producer: John Hammond

Assistant to Executive Producer: Mikie Harris Engineer: Richard Mullen Assistant Engineer: Ron Cote Mixed byRichard Mullen Recorded at Dallas Sound Labs, Dallas, Texas and Riverside Sound, Austin, Texas This album is

dedicated to the memory of Charlie Wirz.

The following article below appeared on the internet regarding Mikie Harris:

Exhibit 2 (Taken off the internet) Brian Slawson

While playing marimba on the streets of New York City to finance his studies at Juilliard, Brian Slawson

was discovered by Mikie Harris, assistant to Columbia Records talent scout John Hammond. Bach On Wood, Slawson's

debut album on CBS/Sony, earned a Grammy nomination. Slawson has since released Bach Beat and Distant Drums,which features cameos by blues great Stevie Ray Vaughan, jazz trumpeter Freddie Hubbard and drummer Michael

Shrieve. Slawson has performed with Leonard Bernstein, John Cage, Aaron Copland, Isaac Stern and Jessye Norman.

His pop credits as drummer and percussionist include Pat Benetar, Peggy Lee, Johnny Mathis, Marie Osmond, TheMamas and Papas, and Ben Vereen. Slawson is Principal Timpanist with the Orlando and Brevard Symphony

Orchestras, and Resident Percussion Instructor at the Academy of the

Bach on wood by Brian Slawson CD cover produced by Mikie Harris

http://www.slawsongs.com/

Stevie Ray Vaughan later recorded on Bob Dylan's "Under the Red Sky" album, released in 1990.


16 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1982

I (James Damiano) registered my first copyright with the Library of Congress in Washington DC. In 1982. The library

registration number is PAU 409-107, Titled Collective songs by James Damiano. The computer print out of the

registration describes the registration as lyric sheets and one Cassette tape. This tape included Dylan's 1994 hit song"Dignity" { Lyrical hook and melody line } In 1994 Bob Dylan released a song titled "Dignity" who he claims to have

independently written.

Although I have to go through my records to find a copy of the copyright filing the following exhibit was produced to the

court and to the defendants. It is a faxed note to James Damiano from Dr. Greene explaining that there is a good chance

that careful examination may show that in 1982 James Damiano was experimenting with musical ideas that later

came together as Steel Guitars.


17 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

I (James Damiano) registered my second copyright with the Library of Congress in Washington DC. In May of 1988. Thelibrary registration number is PAU 409-107, Titled Collective songs by James Damiano. The computer print out of the

registration describes the registration as lyric sheets and one Cassette tape. ( Displayed below) This tape also included

Dylan's 1994 hit song "Dignity" { Lyrical hook and melody line } In 1994 Bob Dylan released a song titled "Dignity" whohe claims to have independently written.

Dylan's copyright produced in this litigation by his attorney's states that Dylan's first registration made to the Library ofCongress was December 5th, 1991. Dignity was nominated for a Grammy by the National Academy of Popular and was

the hit song on Bob Dylan's Greatest Hits Volume 3.


18 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Dylan used this cover in Europe but not in the United States

Dignity was also the hit song on Bob Dylan's Greatest hits Volume 3, and the

Unplugged CD, and DVD which generated a great deal of money for him. .


19 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

There was also a live version of dignity released on MTV's Bob Dylan Unplugged

Grammy's Boost Record Sales by Jeffrey Jolson-Colburn Mar 4, 1998, 6:15 PM PT

It's called the Grammy bump, and it goes something like this: See an act win a Grammy (or sing a song on the Grammytelecast), then go out and buy the album.

With 25 million viewers watching the show this year, that's a lot of potential record buyers.

. True to form, the Titanic soundtrack was buoyed by Celine Dion's belting out "My Heart Will Go On" on the 40th


20 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Grammy Awards last Wednesday and berthed in the No. 1 slot for the eighth consecutive week. The collection of mostly

orchestral tracks sold 505,000 units for the week ended March 1.

The Grammy cast also propelled the compilation album 1998 Grammy Nominees into the No. 11 spot with sales of 72,000

units, almost double the previous week's 37,000. The album features winning songs from the likes of Shawn Colvin, R.

Kelly, Paula Cole, Fiona Apple and Erykah Badu.

Deservedly, the album getting the biggest boost was Bob Dylan's multiaward-winning Time Out of Mind, which jumped a

whopping 95 places up to No. 27.

The sales on Titanic were off a bit from the soundtrack phenomenon's previous week's total of 563,000. Dion's Grammy

crooning also helped her own album Let's Talk About Love hold the No. 2 spot. Both albums feature the song, which likethe movie, has struck an emotional chord with fans.

Holding the No. 3 slot is rapper Silkk the Shocker, with a smooth 141,000 units of Charge It 2 Da Game, off from lastweek's debut of 248,000. Pop-rockers Savage Garden sowed a crop of 101,000 new fans in fourth place, while the goofy

soundtrack to the Wedding Singer married 97,000 albums and fans to land at No. 5.

The Backstreet Boys sold a manly 91,000 copies of their self-titled debut to chart at No. 6, and Usher did it his way inseventh, selling 90,000 units of My Way.

K-Ci & JoJo have Love Always for another 88,000 people who bought their debut disc. The rookie rappers rose fromeleventh to eighth.

Rock rounding out the last two spots in the Top 10. Matchbox 20--shut out of the Grammys--sold 79,000 copies of theirdebut Yourself of Someone Like You and Pearl Jam's Yield brought up the rear with sales of 73,000.

Since the beginning of my (James Damiano's) involvement with Mikie Harris, I had been sending her tapes that Irecorded at home on my cassette deck. After of about a year and a half of talking on the phone, sending lyric sheets of my

songs to Mikie as well as bringing cassettes with my music up to her at CBS Records, Mikie asked me if I would like to

audition for Mr. Hammond.

None of my songs at that time had been recorded in a professional recording studio.

I accepted the invitation to audition for Mr. Hammond and Mikie told me that she would call me back in a week to set up

the time and place.

A week later Mikie called and told me that she had set up the audition for three months from that date. The audition

would be at Mr. Hammond's office in the Media Sound Building in New York on West 57th Street at Eleven O'clock in

the Morning. I started practicing fifteen hours a day seven days a week. The three months seemed like forever.

The morning of the audition Mikie called me and told me that she would have to cancel the audition. I told her that I

couldn't believe what she was telling me. She knew I quit my job three months prior, to practice for the audition. Finallyafter while she told me that she wanted to keep it out of the news and that Mr. Hammond was in the hospital. She then

assured me that once Mr. Hammond was out of the hospital she would reschedule the audition.

A few months later Mikie called and rescheduled the audition for a few months from that date. I was excited and called a

person who I was working with at the time named Allen LeWinter.

Allen worked with Don Kirshner and was associated with the band Kansas. Allen and his wife were living in a beautiful

high rise condo on the East side. I loved going up there. They had a spectacular view from their balcony, and gold Kansasalbums hanging on the wall.

Allen told me that his wife wrote scripts for soap operas.

Allen was a cool guy, well mannered, polite, modest, just your all around classy person. Kind of an artistic guy whose

greatest attribute was his sincerity.

It seemed , Allen's job was to seek out talent in the suburbs. Everything else goes without saying. Allen respected Mr.

Hammond immensely and was looking forward to going to the audition with me.

When I told Allen that the audition was back on we made arrangements for me to pick him up at his condo the morning of


21 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

the audition.

Again I started practicing and practicing fourteen hours a day when Mikie sent me a book titled "John Hammond onRecord."

I was all practiced out, I couldn't practice anymore, so I read the book.

The book put me in semi-shock. It identified Mr. Hammond as the most influential music executive in the world.

The days counted down to three nights before the audition and I couldn't sleep. The following night I couldn't sleep, till

finally the night before.

It was twelve midnight the night before. I laid in bed trying to go to sleep but still could not It seemed impossible. My

adrenalin wouldn't stop pumping.

One A.M. rolled around, I was still wide awake and I hadn't slept in a couple days. Around two thirty I went downstairs

grabbed a bottle of tequila and started drinking. Within a half hour I finally fell asleep.

The audition was for eleven oclock in the morning. I woke at seven, jumped in the car, drove to New York, picked up

Allen and we drove cross town to the audition. We parked the car, I grabbed my guitar and we started to walk to Mr.

Hammond's office when I started feeling ill.

Allen quickly started trying to help me pull myself together with words of support, by calmly saying "You can do this "

while I was thinking "he must be crazy, he doesn't understand how sick I feel" anyway I had no other alternative but tobelieve what Allen was saying to me and to simply pull myself together.

We entered the building and the receptionist called up to Mikie to tell her we were there, she hung up the phone and toldus that Mikie said for us to go up. When we got to the office Mikie was waiting and quickly asked me if I'd like to tune my

guitar. I said yes and she brought me down into a recording studio where she pointed to a piano and said "You can tune

your guitar to this piano, it's the piano that Billy Joel records on." My first reaction was " Now that's a dose of reality notto many musicians could swallow." and with that thought I had to wonder what she expected from me. My second

reaction was "Now that's inspiration.

I started tuning the guitar, when all of a sudden a string broke. I put down the quitter and said to Allen I'll be right back.

I jumped up, ran down the stairs, stopped at the receptionist and asked her to get me some packets of salt, I ran a couple

blocks down to the car and asked the valet where my car was. He pointed me to it and I ran down and grabbed a case thathad guitar strings in it.

I ran back to the building , and as I ran past the receptionist she handed me the salt, I ran back up the stairs, put on thestring, tuned the guitar, licked some salt and followed Mikie back up to Mr. Hammond's office.

Mikie told Allen and me to have a seat and that Mr. Hammond would be in a couple minutes. We waited a few minutes,then Mr. Hammond walked in. Mikie introduced us. We all shook hands, Mr. Hammond sat down at his desk and started

out the conversation with a comment about Bruce Springsteen. We talked for a while and Mr. Hammond asked to hear

one of my songs.

I played four songs for Mr. Hammond. One of which was titled "Living Proof." Mr. Hammond also read a song of mine


22 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

that when I handed it to him I explained that I had written the song on an electric guitar and that since I only had an

acoustic guitar with me, that I'd rather not try to play it. Mr. Hammond politely understood and said that he would like

to hear it with music after it was recorded.

The song Mr. Hammond read is displayed below:

I've got a plush A frame

Overlooking the Ocean

With a fireplace to keep us warm

When it's cold

Cathedral ceilings

For romantic evenings

And lights that turn down low

In the garage there's a brand new

silver blue porche

It's a 911- E

And all these luxuries

Can be yours for a while honey

If you just say yes to me

Just say yes to me honey

Just say yes to me


And give up your dignity

I like playing golf racquetball and tennis

And I bet on all the sports

And I'm part owner of a nice little cottage

Lodged up at a ski resort

My boats docked down at Little Creek Marina

I just got a set of new sail

On warm summer nights we'll sail out on the bay

And watch falling stars make trails

It's a good life when the money's right

You can satisfy your curiosity

And all you have to do honey

Is just say yes to me


Just say yes to me


23 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM


And give up your integrity

My bank accounts bigger

Than the houses I own

Bigger than all three

Live in maids clean all day

To give us more time to be free

Well go out every night

Where you can show off all your new clothes

And expensive jewelry

And all you have to do honey is

Just say yes to me

Just say yes to me


And give up your dignity

The song that Mr. Hammond read at the audition was untitled at the time but identified with two separate names.

One of the identification of this song was "Just say yes to me" the second was "Dignity". I copyrighted this song

with the Library of Congress in 1982.

Twelve years later Bob Dylan was nominated for a Grammy for a song titled "Dignity" released on his 1994 Bob

Dylan's Greatest Hit's album and also on his MTV Bob Dylan Unplugged album.

The relationship between Mr. Hammond, CBS Records, Mikie , and myself continued for over Eleven Years. I

kept submitting material. Musicians that I was playing with at the time would come up to CBS Records with me

when I went to bring new songs that I had written up to Mikie.

Exhibit 4 1982 [later that year]

In 1982 Mikie sent me a Christmas card stating ;

Dear Jim,

"Wishing you a splendid Christmas and a most prosperous New Year."

(signed) - Love Mikie, Randy, Duke and Nikkie too. December 1982.


24 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Mikie invited me to stay at her home for weeks at a time where I wrote and experimented with songs on her baby

grand piano all the while submitting more and more material to her.

It was around this time James recorded "Bury Me In New York City" with Tommy LaBella and carolyne Mass.

See Carolyn Mass's website below

Carolyne_Mass_website

1986

I ( James Damiano) met Danny Gallagher in 1986. Danny was in one of Bruce Springsteen's first original bands

"Doctor Zoom and the Sonic Boom". Rumor has it that Springsteen was sleeping on Danny's couch when he got

signed to CBS Records. Nevertheless Danny and Springsteen still remain friends as of today {August 5th 1997}

Danny was a great steel guitar player. I asked Danny if he would put a steel guitar track on "Steal Guitars" (also

identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration) and he agreed to do so. He also told me

he that had a friend named Mario who played a great electric guitar and who did some touring with members of

the New Riders of the Purple Sage.

Danny set up the recording session at Mario's home, we set up the equipment and recorded "Steal Guitars." (also

identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration)

The Declaration of Danny Gallagher {Displayed below}

Danny Gallagher a musician who recorded the dobro guitar track on James Damiano's song "Steel Guitars" (also

identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration) declares under penalty of perjury that:


25 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

I am a musician and I play the dobro guitar. I reside at -- _____________ Terrace __________Ireland. I recorded

songs with James Damiano in the year 1986. I Danny Gallahger declare that in 1986 I played and recorded the

dobro guitar track on James Damiano's song " Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982

copyright registration) The song I am referring to in statement #5 of this declaration is the same song that is

playing in the background of this taped statement or declaration. A week after James Damiano and I recorded the

song "Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration)

Mr. Damiano told me that he went to New York to submit a copy of it to Mikie Harris at CBS.

Big Danny Gallagher with Bruce Springsteen

Plaintiff's Steven M. Kramer refused to submit Danny Gallagher's Declaration to the court, until the

reconsideration motion. When Plaintiff asked Mr. Kramer why he was not submitting Mr. Gallegher's Declaration

in his opposition brief to Defendants summary judgment motion, Mr. Kramer replied that "He didn't want to

appear weak to the court

Mario Phillips a musician who recorded the electric guitar track on "Steel Guitars" aka (also identified as

"Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration) during the same recording session with Danny

Gallagher and James Damiano declares under penalty of perjury that:

My full Name is Gregory S. Phillipps (aka. Mario) I was born in _________________Washington. I reside at

_____________________Washington In the year 1986 I played and recorded on an instrumental song of James

Damiano's. Said song in #4 was recorded at the address I was living at in New Jersey Danny Gallagher also played

the dobro guitar on this song The song I am referring to was played to me on the phone by James Damiano. I

recognized the song as the song James, Danny and I recorded in 1986.

http://www.bluespower.com/a-mb.htm

Major talent scout, John Hammond Sr. brought Stevie Ray Vaughan, Bob Dylan, Aretha Franklin, Leonard

Cohen and Bruce Springsteen to Columbia Records. Hammond also worked as a producer with such early greats

as Bessie Smith, Billie Holiday, Benny Goodman and Count Basie

[email protected],[email protected],[email protected].

On June 6th 1987 Mikie wrote a letter to me stating ;


26 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Dear Jim:

Thanks for 'sharing' your lyrics / poetry with me. To me, your work represents a lot of time and effort but, from an

artistic point of view, I feel that it is representative of poetry rather than a song in today's commercial market of

music.

Since no tape accompanied the words, I have no way of knowing what your ideas are with regard to the music.

I just wish that there was some way for me to be of help to you, but with things the way they are, especially

regarding Mr. Hammond's health, my hands are tied.

Our office has (at least since I've been associated with John) been actively involved with publishing, which is

something I suggested you try to your material several years ago.

I still maintain that this is the best route for you. Publishers can reach major artists and guide you with regard to

your material.

On the basis of the material that you have just now presented to me, I think it might stand a stronger chance

of being recognized as a volume of straight poetry rather than songs.

Because of Mr. Hammond's policy with regard to his relationships with artists he has worked with, I will not be

able to present your material to Bob Dylan.

Jim, I wish you the best ( but surely you know this by now after all these years ) and I'm only sorry that our office

can't be of assistance to you. Take care Mikie.


27 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

This is the letter I received after Mikie took my songs for seven and a half years.

A copy of the envelope which enclosed Mikie Harris's letter is displayed below. Please note JOHN HAMMOND /

MIKIE HARRIS below CBS Logo.

Plaintiff contends that many statements in Ms. Harris's letter are false and purposely misleading.

Another letter from CBS is displayed below:

Taken from deposition disc also on video taped deposition.

Scott Patterson testified in a video tape deposition below:

Please note: All depositions besides Plaintiff's are video taped:

2 A. He never -- it was kind of like in

3 the beginning he had things to talk to me about

4 and then he came to the store and I think he made

5 the connection because I knew Tony and I also had

6 met Mikie Harris through Tony Tiller and I knew a

7 lot of those people.

Patterson Deposition

15 Q. Now, Mr. Patterson, when did you

16 first meet the plaintiff in this action, James

17 Damiano?

18 A. I guess it would be around '88. I'm


28 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

19 not sure of the date. I had met Jim at

20 Broccoli-Rabe Studios when he was recording there

21 and I worked on a couple of his sessions. That is

22 my extent of meeting Jim until last year when he

23 came up to my store.

24 Q. And you were working at Broccoli-Rabe

25 Studios in 1988?

24

1 Patterson

2 A. Right. I did assistant engineering

3 on and off there.

4 Q. Was that a formal position, assistant

5 engineer, or was it on an as-needed basis?

6 A. As-needed basis.

7 Q. Who owned Broccoli-Rabe?

8 A. Brian Draigo.

19 Q. Was there a chief engineer?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Who was that?

22 A. Phil Pfisterer. Phil and I had a

23 production company together called I-n-d-i-e Music

24 Productions

13 Q. Do you know when Mr. Damiano recorded

14 music at Broccoli-Rabe Studios?

15 A. It would probably be around '87,

16 because in '88 I worked with Tony Tiller out in


29 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

17 Sammy Fields.

23 A. Yes. The relationship between myself

24 and Tony Tiller came through Phil Pfisterer, not

25 through Jim Damiano. Phil met Tony Tiller through

26

1 Patterson

2 Jim Damiano at a party,

17 A. I met Tony Tiller through Phil

18 Pfisterer, who was my partner. Phil met Tony

19 through Jim Damiano at a party at Tony's house.

20 Phil went with Jim to the party.

21 Q. Did Mr. Damiano ask you to come to

22 this meeting?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. What did he tell you the purpose of

25 the meeting was?

58

1 Patterson

2 A. He never -- it was kind of like in

3 the beginning he had things to talk to me about

4 and then he came to the store and I think he made

5 the connection because I knew Tony and I also had

6 met Mikie Harris through Tony Tiller and I knew a

7 lot of those people.

8 Q. When you say a lot of those people,

9 who else other than Tony Tiller and Mikie Harris?

10 A. Tony Tiller and Mikie Harris -- he


30 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

11 asked how he could get in touch with Mikie. I had

12 worked with her son, Duke, he has a band called

13 Marble.

14 Q. In working with Mikie Harris' son,

15 that had absolutely nothing to do with James

16 Damiano?

17 A. No, not at all. I didn't even know

18 Jim knew Mikie. I had met Mikie -- Tony had a

19 party at his house and I met Mikie there.

20 MR. SNYDER: Mr. Kramer, could you

21 go outside to do that.

22 MR. KRAMER: Oh, sure.

23 MR. SNYDER: Thanks.

24 Q. When you met Mikie, that again had

25 nothing to do with James Damiano and his recording

59

1 Patterson

2 of music or anything like that?

3 A. No. Actually, Mikie -- we were at a

4 party at Tony's house, and Mikie -- we started

5 talking and it ended up she knew a lot of people

6 that I knew through the studio and stuff.

Exhibit 8 Taken off the internet

Mikie Harris is on the National Academy of Popular Music / Songwriters Hall of Fame - Board of Director's

Plaintiff believes that this organization is instrumental in nominating Grammy nominees. This exhibit explains the

caliber of the people Mikie was associated with in the music industry not that she needed and credentials after

working with John Hammond Sr. the last ten years of his career.


31 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Martin Bandier Chairman and CEO of EMI Music Publishing. Administers the copyrights of close to one million

songs. Billboard's Pop and Black Music Publisher of the Year in the U.S. for a record seven consecutive years.

Board member of EMI Group plc, the NMPA, the BMI Foundation and Board of Trustees of Syracuse University,

his Alma Mater.

Freddy Bienstock Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Carlin Music International; Board Member of ASCAP,

Harry Fox Agency and National Music Publishers Association; Recipient of Songwriters' Hall Of Fame Abe

Olman Publishers Award, 1996.

Oscar Brand Singer/Songwriter; Composer for Broadway Musicals (Hyman Kaplan, A Joyful Noise, Kennedy

Center Bicentennial Musical Sing American Sing), Ballets (Gold Rush for Agnes Demille) and Films (Blue Chips,

The Fox, Sybil, The Long Riders). Songs Include: A Guy is a Guy, My Old Man's a Sailor, When I First Came to

This Land, Where Were You Last Night, Wayward Boy. Founding Director and Curator of the Songwriters' Hall

of Fame; TV and Radio Broadcaster; Author (The Ballad Mongers, Songs of '76, Singing Holidays, etc.). Irving

Burgie Songwriter; Publisher; Member of ASCAP and Songwriters' Guild since 1956. Songs Include: Day O;

Jamaica Farewell; Island in the Sun; and 34 songs recorded by Harry Belafonte. Musical: Ballad for Bimshire.

Honorary Doctor of Letters, University of the West Indies (1989).

Tita Cahn Widow of lyricist Sammy Cahn, President Emeritus of the Songwriters' Hall of Fame, 1973-1993.

Ervin Drake Vice President, NAPM; Scholarship Committee Chairman, NAPM; Songwriter; Writer and/or

Producer of Stage and T.V. Shows; Former President of Songwriters' Guild of America; Songwriters' Hall of Fame

Inductee; Songs include: It Was a Very Good Year; I Believe; Perdido; Good Morning, Heartache; Tico Tico; A

Room Without Windows; Al Di La. All songs in cast album revival CD "Her First Roman," 1994; All songs in

Leslie Uggams CD "Painted Mem'ries," 1995; Eight songs in current CD "From John Gabriel with Love."

Al Feilich Dinner Committee Chairman, NAPM; Retired Vice President, Information & Research, BMI; B'nai

B'rith, District One Board Of Governors; Executive Committee, Peninsula Chapter Cancer Care; Lifetime

Member, Basketball Hall of Fame; Serves on Executive, Museum, Scholarship, Nominations and Special Awards

Committees, NAPM.

Charles Feldman Vice President BMI, Came from EMI where he was Vice President, worked with The Neville

Brothers, Barry Mann, Carol King, Gerry Goffin, Tony Joe White, Toni Wine, and Wendy Waldman, Music

supervisor and executive soundtrack producer of motion picture "Tender Mercies," Started out as songwriter

signed to Muscle Shoals Music, National Trustee of NARAS, Vice Chairman of Entertainment Division

UJA-Federation.

Mark Fried President, Spirit Music Group; Board of Directors - Songwriter Associations of Boston, Philadelphia

and Washington; Co-Producer of Songwriters: Inside Out.

Milt Gabler Record Producer; Founder of Commodore Records; Worked with Decca/MCA until 1971; Founding

Father of NARAS; Produced songs in Grammy Hall of Fame: Bill Haley's Rock Around the Clock, Billie

Holiday's Strange Fruit and Lover Man and Lionel Hampton's Flying Home. Other songs include: Danke Schoen;

L-O-V-E; In a Mellow Tone; Choo-Choo-Ch'boogie.

Jules Goldberg Executive Director, NAPM; Ex-Officio on Museum, Dinner, Nominating and all other

Committees; Realtor; Former President of Old Westbury Hebrew Congregation (still a trustee); Chairman af the

Village Board of Appeals; Member of the Council of Temple Presidents of Nassau County.

Sonny Golden Business Manager; Golden/Goldberg Accountancy Corporation.

Mikie Harris Record Producer; President/Creative Affairs, Theatre Video Playhouse, Inc. and MIRI Music

Companies.


32 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

[NAPM] [Links] [Board of Directors] [Showcases] [Workshops] [Membership] [Newsletter] [SHOF] ï¿½1999

Songwriters' Hall of Fame, The National Academy Of Popular Music. Inquires email April Anderson Web site

questions email [email protected]

Another new finding of fact which has surfaced concerning Mikie Harris is identified as exhibit 13 below. This

exhibit displays production credits on the album: Produced and arranged by Bruce Springsteen and Miami Steve

Van Zandt. Other production credits listed are Mikie Harris for background vocals. A true and correct copy of

this web site of the production credits

There is also a Bob Dylan song on the album titled From a Buick 6.

SONGS * BIOGRAPHY * TIMELINE * NEWS

DADDY'S COME HOME from LP: "Dedication" Gary U.S. Bonds 1981, EMI America Records Dedication Gary

U.S. Bonds 1981, EMI America Records

Songs Jole Blon (Moon Mullican / Fort Knox Music Co.BMI)* This Little Girl (Bruce Springsteen ASCAP)*

Your Love (Bruce Springsteen ASCAP)* Dedication (Bruce Springsteen ASCAP)* Daddy's Come Home (Stevie

Van Zandt / Blue Midnight Music)**

It's Only Love (J. Lennon - P. McCartney / Maclen Music, Inc. BMI)**

The Pretender (Jackson Browne / Swallow Turn Music/WB Music Corp. ASCAP)**

Way Back When (G. U.S. Bonds-G. Bruno / King Kong Music/Gary Bonds Music BMI)***

From A Buick 6 (Bob Dylan / Warner Bros. Inc. ASCAP)**

Just Like A Child (J. Clemente-L. Conte-L. Anderson / King Kong Music/Gary Bonds Music/Smooth Sailing

Music BMI/ASCAP)**

Liner Notes & Production Credits

* Produced & Arranged by Miami Steve & Bruce Springsteen ** Produced & Arranged by Miami Steve Associate

Producer: Garry Tallent *** Produced by Gary U.S. Bonds, Lanny Lambert & Rob Parissi Additional Recording

& Mix Produced by Miami Steve with Garry Tallent

MUSICIANS: Accordion: Danny Federici Bass: Garry Tallent; John Clemente Drums: Mike Micara; Max

Weinberg Fuzz Bass & Bongos: Miami Steve Guitars: Louie Conte; Rob Parissi; Bruce Springsteen; Miami Steve

Keyboards: Roy Bittan; Rusty Cloud; Danny Federici Baritone Sax: Joey Stann Tenor Sax: Clarence Clemons (all

solos); Ed Manion Trombone: La Bamba Trumpet: Rick Gazda; Michael Spengler Vocals: Ben E. King & Chuck

Jackson on "Your Love" Background Vocals: Ellie Greenwich; Mikie Harris; Ula Hedwig; Brenda Hilliard (solo

on "The Pretender"); Carol Sylvan; Carol Williams; Bruce Springsteen (solo on "Jole Blon" and "This Little

Girl"); Miami Steve; Clarence Clemons Thank You BEN E. and CHUCK Chuck Jackson appears courtesy of

Sugarhill Records Bruce Springsteen appears courtesy CBS Records Inc. Ben E. King appears courtesy Atlantic

Records Corporation

Engineers: Neil Dorfsman; Bob Clearmountain; Tony Bongiovi; Larry Alexander; Bill Scheniman Assistant

Engineers: Jason Corsaro; Dave Greenberg; Jeffry Hendrickson; Garry Rindfuss; Ray Willhard Recorded & Mixed

at the Power Station, New York City (except "Way Back When," recorded and mixed at Sound Mixers, Randy

Mason, Engineer) Mastered at Precision Lacquer by Larry Emerine & Stephen Marcussen Swoopman Apocalypse

Chuck Plotkin Management: John Apostol, Apostol Enterprises, Ltd. Album Design & Photography: Jimmy


33 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Wachtel, for Dawn Patrol Additional Photography: Tom Gibson & Barry Goldenberg Hand Lettering: Gloria Von

Jansky Special thanks to: Big Laurie Anderson & Little Laurie Anderson, Gary Gersh, and Everybody at EMI

Mikie Harris also was given production credit on Stevie Ray Vaughan's album "Soul to Soul."

Plaintiff produces to this court the following article ( review ) to the court Please note that Stevie Ray Vaughan

played on Bob Dylan's album "Under the Red Sky." In fact, numerous musicians that played on the "Bob Dylan

Unplugged" album also shared similar credits on Stevie Ray Vaughan albums. Mikie Harris is given production

credits as Assistant to Producer John Hammond.

When I (James Damiano ) received the June 15th, 1987 letter from Mikie Harris stating that she could not be of

assistance to me, I called her at CBS and asked to speak to her. A man answered the phone and told me that

Mikie was at the hospital with Mr. Hammond. His name was Tony Tiller and he said that he was watching over

the office while Mikie was out.

Mr. Tiller then asked me if I was the person who wrote the material on Mr. Hammond' s desk. I asked him what

material he was referring to and he replied the songs in the big black notebook. I replied yes and we started to

converse about the songs. He told me that he liked them and invited me up to CBS to meet with him. Tony

showed a great deal of enthusiasm for my material. We started meeting or corresponding over the phone as Mikie

and I had and Anthony started inviting me to parties in New York that other CBS people would attend.

The following article in which Tony Tiller's name appears and is given credit on an album which contained songs

released by Bob Dylan.

Exhibit 14 displays the album credits Tony Tiller as the Project Coordinator on The Byrds Box set which

contained songs written by Bob Dylan.

4k. THE BYRDS BOXED SET (Columbia/Legacy C4K 46773; 1990) _ Credits: Released October 1990.

Compilation produced by Don DeVito and Bob Irwin. Musical Consultant: Roger McGuinn. Remastered and

remixed by Tim Geelan & Vic Anesini. Project Director: Gary Pacheco. Project Coordination: Tony Tiller. Art

Direction: Joel Zimmerman and Lisa Sparagano.

Personnel: The Byrds v. 1.0 The Byrds v. 2.0 The Byrds v. 3.1 The Byrds v. 4.0 The Byrds v. 6.0 The Byrds v. 6.1

and on all new material: The Byrds v. 8.0: Roger McGuinn: vocals, 12-string guitar David Crosby: vocals Chris

Hillman: vocals, bass plus: On "Turn! Turn! Turn!" Add John Jorgenson on guitar Add Steve Duncan on drums

On "Mr. Tambourine Man" Add John Jorgenson on guitar Add Steve Duncan on drums With Bob Dylan on

vocals & guitar On "Paths of Victory" Add John Jorgenson on mandolin Add Stan Lynch on drums On "From A

Distance" David Crosby add guitar Add John Jorgenson on guitar, and mandolin Add Stan Lynch on drums On

"Love That Never Dies" Chris Hillman plays guitar and not bass Add John Jorgenson on lead guitar and bass Add

Stan Lynch on drums Add Al Kooper on keyboards Songwriting Credits: "Turn! Turn! Turn!" by Pete Seeger;

lyrics adapted from the Book of Ecclesiastes "Mr. Tambourine Man" by Bob Dylan "He Was A Friend of Mine"

by Jim McGuinn "Paths of Victory" by Bob Dylan " Musically, The Byrds Boxed Set lives up to its billing as a

"definitive" collection.

The URL of this page is:

http://ebni.com/byrds/lpbox.html This page was last revised on February 20, 1997 DEFENDANTS TRY TO

MAINTAIN TO THE COURT THAT THE PEOPLE AT CBS RECORDS / SONY MUSIC WERE IN

POSSESSION OF JAMES DAMIANO'S SONGS, WERE NOT IN ANY POSITION TO ADVANCE

PLAINTIFFS CAREER AS A SONGWRITER IN THE MUSIC INDUSTRY.

The following exhibits downloaded from the internet conclusively refute Defendants position of said defense.


34 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

I brought a sound engineer that I had worked with in the studio to one of Tony's parties. Not long after this, the

engineer started working in the studio with Mr. Tiller on a musical project that Tony Tiller was producing.

Scott Patterson testified below Please note: All depositions besides Plaintiff's are video taped:

23 A. Yes. The relationship between myself

24 and Tony Tiller came through Phil Pfisterer, not

25 through Jim Damiano. Phil met Tony Tiller through

26

1 Patterson

2 Jim Damiano at a party,

17 A. I met Tony Tiller through Phil

18 Pfisterer, who was my partner. Phil met Tony

19 through Jim Damiano at a party at Tony's house.

20 Phil went with Jim to the party.

July 10th, 1987

July 10th, 1987 Tony Tiller asked me If I would like to submit material to Bob Dylan. I told him sure I would. He

told me to mail the songs to Dylan at the Meadowlands Arena in East Rutherford New Jersey. I mailed them

certified mail with return receipt requested. Produced during discovery in this litigation is Exhibit # 27 a certified

mail receipt sent to Bob Dylan at the Meadowlands Arena Route 20, East Rutherford New Jersey. The date of

this receipt is July 10th, 1987.

[ a copy the Meadowlands arena certified mail receipt has been produced to defendants and the court during

discovery]

On the same day July 10th, 1987 John Hammond. Sr. passed away. An article downloaded from the internet is

displayed below.

One day shortly before Mr. Hammond's death I was in New York and I called him from the lobby house phone at

CBS as he told me to do from the first time I went to see him. Usually when I called from the lobby house phone

he would tell me to come up to his office. He would call the security guard at the front desk and give his tell the


35 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

security guard to permit me to enter the elevator and I would go up to his office.

This particular day he said to me "don't come up because I'm coming down shortly" . His voice had a ringing

excitement to it when he then asked me if I'd like to go with him to Carnegie Hall that night where he was going

to record Stevie Ray Vaughan live. I remember the excitement in his voice still to this day. I was just excited and

honored that he asked me to go with him. I was extremely flattered and honored.

I told Mr. Hammond I would love to go and he told me to meet him at the back entrance. He told me that he

would be at the mobile recording unit outside of the back stage entrance and to look for a large truck or van.

I met Mr. Hammond there. As soon as we entered through the backstage door Mr. Hammond was swarmed by

reporters attempting to ask him questions mostly about his health because he was recently released from the

hospital. Mr. Hammond wasn't concerned with answering questions about himself. I stood back and watched. He

was surrounded by reporters all talking to him all at once. I could feel his excitement, I could feel his adrenalin

flowing, and I knew his intentions were not to talk about himself but to record Stevie Ray Vaughan yet I could

see him trying to slow himself down so as to be polite to the reporters like a Jockey on a racehorse trying to slow

the horse down after a race.

Mr. Hammond spoke to the reporters for a short while, then tried to make an exit but they wouldn't let him go.

The reporters kept asking him questions. From my recollection Mr. Hammond's reaction to their questions could

only be best described as reminiscent of a tv newsperson flashing a microphone in a politicians face who was

caught in a scandal as he walked out of the court room, although Mr. Hammond was not in that position. It was

just the look on his face that resembled the notion of that similar situation I described. It appeared to me that all

Mr. Hammond wanted to say to the reporters was "Are you kidding Stevie Ray Vaughan's on the stage and he's

getting ready to play".

Mr. Hammond then said to the reporter something to the effect and very politely "Now if you'll excuse me I'll go

record this concert" He was seventy three or seventy four years old then, he was just out of the hospital, yet he

continuously walked on to the stage to check the microphones, then out the backstage door, down some shakey

metal steps, back up some more shakey metal steps to the mobile recording truck to check the recording levels

and then back again.

It was like he was on a tight rope, or a high wire. I thought he was going to fall a couple times as he lost his

balance. I stayed as close to him as I could in case he fell. I could tell he didn't have all his strength and still

wasn't fully recovered from his heart attack.

I was think to myself the doctors released him to soon but his energy came from his ambition and it reminded me

of my audition with him after not sleeping for three nights before the audition. It was a similar situation although I

was around thirty years old when I auditioned for him and he was in his seventies. It was a great concert.

Doctor John was playing piano that night with Stevie. Mr. Hammond accomplished what he was trying to

achieved that night and parts of the concert were released on a live Stevie Ray Vaughan CD.

Not long after the live recording of Stevie Ray Vaughan at Carnegie Hall was recorded Mr. Hammond died. at his

home in New York. The article in the newspaper stated that Mr. Hammond died at home while listening to a Billy

Holiday record.

Downloaded from the internet:

Major talent scout, John Hammond Sr., died in 1987. He brought Stevie Ray Vaughan, Bob Dylan, Aretha

Franklin, Leonard Cohen and Bruce Springsteen to Columbia Records. Hammond also worked as a producer with

such early greats as Bessie Smith, Billie Holiday, Benny Goodman and Count Basie


36 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

[email protected], [email protected],[email protected].

A few weeks later Tony Tiller told me that he went to the Memorial service for Mr. Hammond and that he

manned the door at the church making certain that everyone signed the quest log. He said Bob Dylan did not

attend and that Bruce Springsteen was there.

January 1st, 1988

In January 1988 , I started recording at Broccoli Rabe studios in Fairfield New Jersey. Among the songs " My

Cousin JoAnn" and "Another Justification" is an instrumental song titled "Steel Guitars" (also identified as

"Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration). The melody line of "Steel Guitars," which is analyzed

in a comparative analysis to Bob Dylan's recording of "Dignity" by both Jon Bob Jovi's piano teacher Harold

Frazee and Harvard University musicologist, Dr. Paul Green.

In a sworn video tape deposition Scott Patterson testified below : Please note: All depositions besides Plaintiff's

are video taped:

1 Patterson

2 A F T E R N O O N S E S S I O N

3 (1:46 p.m.)

4 S C O T T H. P A T T E R S O N,

5 previously sworn, resumed:

15 Q. Now, Mr. Patterson, when did you

16 first meet the plaintiff in this action, James

17 Damiano?

18 A. I guess it would be around '88. I'm

19 not sure of the date. I had met Jim at

20 Broccoli-Rabe Studios when he was recording there

21 and I worked on a couple of his sessions. That is

22 my extent of meeting Jim until last year when he

23 came up to my store.

25 Studios in 1988?

24

1 Patterson

2 A. Right. I did assistant engineering


37 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

3 on and off there.

4 Q. Was that a formal position, assistant

5 engineer, or was it on an as-needed basis?

6 A. As-needed basis.

7 Q. Who owned Broccoli-Rabe?

8 A. Brian Drago.

9 In that time frame of 1989 or

10 whenever Tony and I had that conversation, that

11 was it, that was the end of it. He would mention

12 Jim. Did you hear from him. No. So it was like

13 there was no connection after that.

14 Basically, my relationship with Tony

15 was that of him working with another band, and any

16 connection to Jim Damiano was through Phil

17 Pfisterer, so that was really between Tony, Phil

18 and Jim than it would be more for me. You know,

19 like I said, I only met Jim a couple of times in

20 the studio so I don't really know him personally.

21 I know more about him now -- from 1994 to now than

22 I did back then. You know.

23 Q. Okay. And when you say here in the

24 last sentence that I read --

25 A. Right.

152

1 Patterson

2 Q. -- after Mr. Damiano says, "He" --

3 referring to Mr. Tiller, "He knew that I wanted to


38 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

4 meet Dylan," and your response, "Oh yeah. No, he

5 knew that," the "he" that you are referring to is

6 Tiller, is it not?

7 A. Which one is this?

8 Q. If you look at seven lines from the

9 bottom.

10 A. Right.

11 Q. Okay. Mr. Damiano says, "So he knew

12 that I wanted to meet Dylan." Do you see that?

13 A. Right.

14 Q. And then you say, "Oh yeah. No, he

15 knew that, everybody knew that." Is the "he" --

16 is it fair to say that the "he" there is Tiller,

17 that Tiller knew that Mr. Damiano wanted to meet

18 Dylan? When you used the pronoun "he" --

19 A. Right.

20 Q. -- is the "he" Tiller?

21 A. Yeah, I guess so. I don't really

22 recall that. I knew that Jim wanted to meet Dylan

23 but, you know, but I don't know --

24 Q. I'm just asking who the "he" is?

25 A. The "he" would refer to Tony, right.

153

1 Patterson

2 Q. Okay.

3 A. But I don't know, I don't recall


39 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

4 saying that.

9 A. Okay.

10 Q. Going down to the sixth paragraph

11 from the bottom --

12 A. Okay.

13 Q. -- where you're stating the word 14 "especially." Do you see that? 15 A. Right. 16 Q. Okay. Do you recall,

Scott, giving

17 your opinion of Mr. Damiano's song-writing ability

18 with these words? We will leave out a couple of

19 the words for obvious reasons. But your comment

20 that "Your writing is very intense, I mean you

21 know how to work words" --

22 A. Right.

23 Q. -- is that an accurate statement?

24 A. Right. Yeah, he is very good.

Produced in this litigation is part of the contract with Broccoli Rabe studios and Mohammad Marhoumy who is a

private investor for the Damiano project.

Declaration of Mohammad Marhoumy In a declaration Mohammad Marhoumy a personal investor of James

Damiano's declares under penalty of perjury that:

I Mohammad Marhoumy state that I have read the following statement and I am willing to testify in a court of law

that it is true that on or about July 1987, James Damiano and I drove to New York to attend a meeting with

Anthony Tiller. Anthony Tiller was working for CBS Records . This meeting was in reference to James Damiano's

songs. Mr. Tiller and I discussed the financing of a musical project of James Damiano's music. At this time I

entered into a verbal agreement with Mr. Tiller. I was obligated according to the agreement to supply the money

for the project. After this meeting with Mr. Tiller I invested ten thousand dollars. This money was paid to Brian

Draigo of Broccoli Rabe studios in Fairfield New Jersey, where Mr. Damiano recorded "Another Justification"

and My Cousin JoAnn" . I Mohammad Marhoumy am willing to testify in a court of law that the above statement

is true.

Mr. Marhoumy signed the above declaration on January 2nd , 1995.

Mohammad Marhoumy was also deposed in this litigation by Bob Dylan's attorneys. When Mr. Marhoumy was

asked by Orin Snyder (Dylan's attorney) Mohammad testified

Orin Snyder - Question. "And my question to you, sir is that after those weeks and after you started paying

monthly on the $10,000. Your feelings of disbelief about Mr. Damiano's claims of having some connection to

Bob Dylan"


40 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Mohammad Marhoumy - Answer. "If you want an answer, I'll give you answer. I don't think that Jim was the one

that made me - gave me that disbelief. It was Anthony. I think Jim was just maybe lied to. Like I was. That is how

I perceived it. I took him for a victim just as much as myself. If there was no connection to Mr. Dylan, it wasn't

because of what he said to me, it was because of what Anthony said to me."

The following transcript is from Mohammad Marhoumy's deposition.


2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x 4 JAMES DAMIANO, : 5 Plaintiff, : 6 -against- :Case No. 95-4795 7 SONY

MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT, INC. and : BOB DYLAN, 8 : Defendants. 9 : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

10 May 9, 1996 11 11:28 a.m.

12 Deposition of Non-Party Witness MOHAMED MARHOUMY, 13 taken by Defendants, pursuant to subpoena,

at the 14 offices of Parcher & Hayes, P.C., 500 Fifth 15 Avenue, New York, New York, before Robert E. Levy,

16 a Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public 17 within and for the State of New York.

A p p e a r a n c e s :

3 STEVEN M. KRAMER & ASSOCIATES 4 Attorneys for Plaintiff 150 West 56th Street 5 65th Floor New

York, New York 10019

6 By: STEVEN M. KRAMER, ESQ., 7 of Counsel

8 9 PARCHER & HAYES, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants 10 500 Fifth Avenue 38th Floor 11 New York, New

York 10110-3899

12 By: ORIN S. SNYDER, ESQ., -and- 13 STEVEN HAYES, ESQ., of Counsel

14 15 Also Present:

16 JAMES DAMIANO 17 RAM SUNDRANI, 18 Videographer 4 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED

5 by and between the attorneys for the

6 respective parties hereto that the sealing

7 and filing of the within deposition be, and

8 the same hereby are, waived; and that the

9 transcript may be signed before any Notary

10 Public with the same force and effect as if

11 signed before the Court.

12 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED


41 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

13 that all objections, except as to the form

14 of the question, shall be reserved to the

15 time of trial.

2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning. We

3 are on the record. My name is Ram

4 Sundrani. I'll be the video operator for

5 today, May 9, 1996. I represent Doyle

6 Reporting located at 369 Lexington Avenue,

7 New York, New York.

8 We are here at the office of Parcher

9 & Hayes located at 500 Fifth Avenue, New

10 York, New York. This is the case of James

11 Damiano versus Sony Music Entertainment and Bob Dylan.

12 This is the deposition of Mohamed Marhoumy.

13 At this time counsel will identify

14 themselves.

15 MR. KRAMER: Steven Kramer for the

16 plaintiff.

17 MR. SNYDER: Orin Snyder and Steven

18 Hayes for the defendants.

19 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: At this time I'll

20 have the court reporter swear in the

21 witness.

22 M O H A M E D M A R H O U M Y, (residing at XX

23 XXX Road, Morristown, New Jersey),

24 having been first duly sworn by the Notary

25 Public (Robert E. Levy), was examined and


42 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

5

1 Marhoumy

2 testified as follows:

3 EXAMINATION BY

4 MR. SNYDER:

5 Q. Good morning, sir.

6 A. Good morning.

7 Q. Will you please state your name and

8 spell it?

9 A. Mohamed, M-o-h-a-m-e-d, Marhoumy,

10 M-a-r-h-o-u-m-y.

11 Q. And what is your address, sir?

12 A. ------------- Morristown, New

13 Jersey.

14 Q. What is your telephone number?

15 A. 201----------

16 Q. What is your date of birth?

17 A. November --------

18 Q. Sir, you've never been deposed

19 before, have you?

20 A. No.

20 Q. Thank you. And sir, you are aware

21 that Mr. Damiano has sued Bob Dylan and Sony

22 Music, is that correct?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And you are aware, sir, that his


43 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

25 allegations include allegations that Bob Dylan

24

1 Marhoumy

2 used his lyrics and music?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. If Mr. Damiano is alleging that some

5 of the words and music that Mr. Dylan allegedly

6 used were words and music that came out of the

7 recording session --

8 A. Uh-huh.

9 Q. -- then do you have a 50 percent

10 interest in any revenues that Mr. Damiano might

11 receive in connection with his claims if they

12 arise out of these recording sessions?

13 A. Okay --

14 MR. KRAMER: Talking about from the

15 lawsuit, in other words if an award is made

16 by a jury, is that what you are referring

17 to?

18 MR. SNYDER: Let's just read the

19 question --

20 MR. KRAMER: It is unclear.

21 Q. I'll rephrase the question. You are

22 aware, sir, that Mr. Damiano has sued Bob Dylan

23 and Sony Music?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And his claims are that Mr. Dylan


44 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

25

1 Marhoumy

2 used some of his lyrics and music in Mr. Dylan's

3 songs, that is Mr. Damiano's claim, correct?

4 A. Uh-huh. Yes.

5 Q. And if Mr. Damiano is claiming that

6 some of the songs that Mr. Dylan allegedly stole

7 were songs which you helped to produce, and if Mr.

8 Damiano receives a judgment in this case, let's

9 say, against Mr. Dylan, --

10 A. Uh-huh.

11 Q. -- based on his claims, based on

12 those tapes, do you have a 50 percent interest in

13 that judgment?

14 A. I would say if this allegedly stolen

15 music was on that tape that I produced, the man

16 wrote thousands of songs.

17 Q. I understand.

18 A. I'm not even sure, I'm not sure which

19 ones he claims that Bob Dylan's stole. If the

20 stolen music, as he says, was part of my tape that

21 I paid for, yeah, I believe I'm entitled to it

22 but if it is not, then I'm not.

23 Q. Well, hasn't Mr. Damiano told you

24 that some of the songs that he claims Mr. Dylan

25 used were songs that were on your tape?


45 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

26

1 Marhoumy

2 A. No, actually he didn't.

3 Q. Never discussed that?

4 A. Never discussed that. That it was --

5 we only did one tape. It had like eight songs, I

6 believe. I don't know if -- actually, the tape

7 has no lyrics. The tape we did was just music.

8 So it couldn't be from my tape.

9 Q. Well, one of Mr. Damiano's claims is

10 that Mr. Dylan used his music?

11 A. There is lyrics to the music but they

12 are not on the tape. The tape we have that we

13 produced has no -- well, no, it has lyrics, excuse

14 me, it has lyrics, only one song does have

15 lyrics -- there are eight songs on the tape. One

16 song doesn't have lyrics, one song, My Cousin

17 Joann. There is no lyrics on that song, but the

18 rest of the tape has lyrics so it is possible. I

19 don't know. I don't know which lyrics he is

20 claiming that Bob Dylan stole. It could be one of

21 the songs that we have, and if it is, yes, I

22 believe yes, if he made an agreement with somebody

23 else, that is fine, then his half of that, and if

24 it happened to be one of the songs that I paid

25 for, then I should be entitled to something. If

27


46 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1 Marhoumy

2 it is not, then I'm not entitled to it.

3 Q. Mr. Damiano wrote this statement and

4 asked you to sign it, correct?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And you read it before signing it,

7 correct?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You knew this statement was going to

10 be used in connection with a court case, correct?

11 A. Yes, this is true.

12 Q. And you knew that because it was

13 going to be used in a court case, it was important

14 that the statement be truthful, correct?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And accurate?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And complete?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. You understood that the purpose of

21 this statement was to set forth the facts that you

22 knew related to this case, is that correct?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And that is your signature, correct?

25 A. Yes.

29


47 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1 Marhoumy

2 Q. Why don't you tell us what the

3 circumstances were that brought -- withdrawn.

4 Did you have a conversation with Mr.

5 Damiano before signing this statement about

6 signing the statement?

7 A. The only conversation that I remember

8 is he was suing Bob Dylan. And they were putting

9 together a list of witnesses, and they wanted me

10 to testify. Do I have a problem to testify based

11 on what happened, and that is the only part I was

12 involved with him as far as business when it comes

13 to that. This is the truth. So I signed it.

14 Q. When you say they were putting

15 together a witness list?

16 A. Him and his attorney.

17 Q. Do you remember who his attorney was

18 at the time? 19 A. I've never met his attorney until

20 this morning. I didn't know what his name was or

21 who it was.

10 Q. Okay. Sir, when did you -- have you

11 ever met an individual by the name of Tony Tiller?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And when -- how many times have you

14 met him?

15 A. Only once.

16 Q. And why don't you tell us the


48 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

17 circumstances leading up to your meeting Mr.

18 Tiller?

19 A. Okay. I believe it was 1987 and Jim

20 was working for me at the dealership and I know he

21 was into the music, and you know, writing and

22 listening to music, and he had mentioned that his

23 music is being read by Bob Dylan, and I mean I

24 don't -- I'm not familiar even at that time who

25 Bob Dylan was. I'm not a big music fan of Bob

1 Marhoumy

3 she was like, well, he is this and that, she told

4 me about who Bob Dylan was. I didn't believe him

5 in the beginning. I didn't believe him. He

6 wanted to produce a record that he believed it

7 would end up in Bob Dylan's hands and he needed

8 money to produce that record. It was going to be

9 approximately $10,000. Somewhere around that

10 number. And he was looking for somebody to invest

11 into that and share whatever profit that would

12 come out of this.

13 And at the time, I was into

14 investments. I just bought a few family houses, I

15 had just all kind of credit cards, I had American

16 Express Platinum and that gave me a $10,000 check

17 limit with it, I just got in the mail just at the

18 time he was talking to me about this, and I


49 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

19 thought about it for a while but I wasn't about to

20 make a decision just based on his words, and I

21 wanted to meet with somebody that would concur

22 with what he is saying.

23 And he mentioned Sony Records, CBS

24 building, that he goes there, and he meets with

25 this -- supposedly a big shot with that company,

33

1 Marhoumy

2 his name is Anthony Tiller and he is the one that

3 takes his lyrics to Bob Dylan, and if I don't

4 believe him I can go meet with Anthony. If that

5 would help let me get into the business with him

6 that he wanted to do, and I decided yes, I'll meet

7 with him.

8 Q. Okay. Let me -- good, so now we are

9 up to this meeting?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Let me take you back. You weren't

12 familiar with Bob Dylan when he told you that his

13 music was being read by Bob Dylan?

14 A. I heard of his name. I didn't know

15 his music.

16 Q. You knew he was a famous recording

17 artist?

18 A. Yes, I heard of his name. I was not

19 familiar with his music. I never listened to him.


50 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

34

1 Marhoumy

3 Q. And you didn't believe Mr. Damiano at

4 the time?

5 A. Yes, I didn't.

6 Q. Why didn't you believe him?

7 A. Because I didn't. I don't know much

8 about lyrics myself. When I read his music, his

9 lyrics, to me, it doesn't make sense, I don't

10 understand. But I don't know what Bob Dylan sings

11 either. I mean it could be the same thing, but I

12 didn't think it was true. I just didn't think it

13 was.

14 Q. Well, what other factors caused you

15 to not believe him that it was true?

16 A. The fact that he was just a salesman.

17 You know, Bob Dylan is reading your music, you

18 should be doing something with that. Obviously he

19 was just a salesman, so I didn't believe it.

20 Bottom line is I wasn't just going to spend money

21 based on his words being just a salesman for me.

22 Q. Did Mr. Damiano tell you that any

23 other rock stars were reading his music?

24 A. No. Not at that point.

25 Q. At that point in 1987, sir, did he

35


51 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1 Marhoumy

2 tell you that Bob Dylan was already reading his

3 music?

6 Q. According to Mr. Damiano, that was

7 through Tony Tiller?

8 A. Through Anthony Tiller, yes.

9 Q. That Mr. Damiano told you that he

10 gave his music to Anthony Tiller and Anthony

11 Tiller then gave his music to Mr. Dylan?

12 A. Yes, that is how I perceived it.

13 Q. And you perceived it based on what

14 Mr. Damiano told you?

15 A. Well, until I met Anthony. That's

16 why I wanted to meet with Anthony.

25 Q. At that point in 1987, sir, did he

35

1 Marhoumy

2 tell you that Bob Dylan was already reading his

3 music?

4 A. He was -- yes. He was receiving, his

5 music was being given to Bob Dylan to read.

6 Q. According to Mr. Damiano, that was

7 through Tony Tiller?

8 A. Through Anthony Tiller, yes.

9 Q. That Mr. Damiano told you that he

10 gave his music to Anthony Tiller and Anthony

11 Tiller then gave his music to Mr. Dylan?


52 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

12 A. Yes, that is how I perceived it.

13 Q. And you perceived it based on what

14 Mr. Damiano told you?

15 A. Well, until I met Anthony. That's

16 why I wanted to meet with Anthony.

17 Q. I'm still before --

18 A. Yes, before meeting with him, it was

19 just based on what Jim was telling me.

20 Q. And Mr. Damiano at the time was

21 looking for an investment?

22 A. Looking for somebody to help him with

23 the money.

24 Q. And Mr. Damiano also told you that

25 Anthony Tiller was a big shot at CBS Records?

36

1 Marhoumy

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. How did he describe his position to

4 you?

5 A. I don't exactly recall, but he was in

6 like in the R&R or PR, like entertainment.

7 Q. A&R?

8 A. A&R, that is the right word,

9 something like that, but he was high up in that

10 company.

23 Q. And not believing Mr. Damiano, based


53 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

24 on what he said, you wanted to meet Mr. Tiller,

25 that is your testimony?

37

1 Marhoumy

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Okay, and when was the first time

4 that Mr. Damiano raised with you the possibility

5 of you giving him money to record a tape?

6 A. I would say a couple of weeks before

7 the meeting with Anthony.

8 Q. And he approached you, is that

9 correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And what did he tell you about what

12 he hoped would happen as a result of your

13 investment?

14 A. Well, basically there was that one

15 song that he was -- that he really liked a lot,

16 which is My Cousin Joann, and we just believed

17 that would be a big hit if somebody like Bob Dylan

18 would sing that song, that would be like a big hit

19 and that was -- you know, that's what got me

20 interested.

21 Q. And then your wife told you that yes,

22 in fact Bob Dylan is a big superstar?

23 A. Yes.

24 MR. KRAMER: Gentlemen, could you


54 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

25 possibly speak one at a time.

38

1 Marhoumy

2 THE WITNESS: Okay.

3 MR. KRAMER: So we don't have to do

4 this twice.

5 Q. So in effect Mr. Damiano asked you to

6 invest $10,000 in his recording project?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And before your meeting with Mr.

9 Tiller, did you enter into your agreement with Mr.

10 Damiano?

11 A. No.

12 Q. That was after?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And you gave, as you testified, the

15 $10,000 because you hoped you would make a lot

16 more?

17 A. Of course.

18 Q. And in fact you made nothing?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And in fact Mr. Damiano never paid

21 back the $10,000?

22 A. No.

23 Q. And in fact you've asked it back from

24 him?


55 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

25 A. No.

39

1 Marhoumy

2 Q. Never?

3 A. I never asked it back.

4 Q. Is that because you knew he didn't

5 have it to pay back?

6 A. I know he doesn't have it. It was

7 just a bad decision on my part, a bad business

8 decision. In my mind I just wrote it off.

9 Q. If you knew that Mr. Damiano was

10 flush and had lots of cash, wouldn't you ask him

11 for the $10,000 back?

12 A. I lost track of him for years, but if

13 I heard that he had money, I would have, but I

14 know that he doesn't.

15 Q. But if you knew right now that Mr.

16 Damiano had a $200,000 CD and was living high on

17 the hog, you would call him up and you would say,

18 what about my $10,000, correct?

19 A. If he didn't give it to me, but what

20 I remember about Jim, if he has the money he would

21 give it to me.

22 Q. And in fact the $10,000 investment

23 which you made in 1987, if you compound interest

24 and do all sorts of things to it, you probably are

25 out in current dollars more than 20,000 bucks?


56 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

40

1 Marhoumy

2 A. I would say so.

3 Q. And is it fair to say that you were

4 ultimately unhappy about that sour investment?

5 A. I can say that.

6 Q. Why don't you tell us about that?

7 A. It is just that it didn't get

8 anywhere. After the song was produced, we made a

9 where bunch of tapes and that was the end of it

10 basically. It didn't take off. Nothing happened

11 after that.

12 Q. The tape was never released on a

13 record?

14 A. Yes, it just never happened, it never

15 happened.

16 Q. And for a time, you called Mr.

17 Damiano and kept on him a bit to find out what was

18 happening, correct?

19 A. Yes, and he tried to do a couple of

20 things with it. If I remember, he made a whole

21 bunch of tapes and went to like college campuses

22 and tried to sell them to get some money back,

23 which I wasn't interested in that, you know, but

24 whatever he sold, he sold. I didn't -- in my mind

25 I just wrote it off completely that this was a bad


57 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

41

1 Marhoumy

2 investment. It's over.

3 Q. At some point you wrote it off, sir,

4 I understand, correct?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. But before writing it off, there was

7 a time when you didn't write it off?

8 A. For probably I would say three weeks

9 to a month after the record was done.

10 Q. And during those three weeks to a

11 month after the record was done, you called Mr.

12 Damiano to find out the status of the project,

13 correct?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And when he told you that nothing was

16 being done, is it fair to say that you became, at

17 times, somewhat annoyed at the situation?

18 A. Yes. I wasn't happy about it.

19 Q. What, if anything, did you say to Mr.

20 Damiano about the failure of him to turn that

21 investment into any profit for you?

22 A. I didn't make a case of it. All I

23 remember is just talking to Jim Damiano about it,

24 just stay with it, just don't give up, keep

25 trying. Things of that nature. You know. In my

42


58 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1 Marhoumy

2 mind, you gotta understand, I didn't see Jim doing

3 anything wrong. I think he produced a good

4 record. I liked it, my wife liked it. It was

5 good music. I still got a few tapes. I know I

6 give some to my friends. We did nothing wrong as

7 far as that. The bad part of it is that I'm the

8 one that spent the money on it and I didn't get

9 anything back, but I was convinced that this was a

10 good decision, and at the same time that the tape

11 came out very good. So, he didn't do anything

12 wrong. I was mad at myself.

13 Q. You said you didn't believe him and

14 his claims about Bob Dylan listening to his music

15 when you were in the car dealership before your

16 meeting with Tony Tiller, correct?

17 A. That was your testimony, correct?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. After the meeting and after it became

20 clear that your $10,000 was going down the drain,

21 isn't it fair to say that your feelings of

22 disbelief began to reemerge?

23 A. Not after the meeting. After the

24 tape, two or three weeks after the tape. After

25 the meeting I was very excited.

43


59 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1 Marhoumy

2 Q. We are going to get to the meeting in

3 a minute and your excitement. I'm mow taking you

4 after this meeting. There came a time that it was

5 clear that your $10,000 investment was going down

6 the drain?

7 A. Yes, that sunk in.

8 Q. You got your American Express

9 Platinum bill?

10 A. Uh-huh.

11 Q. Wham, $10,000. You got to pay that?

12 A. Well, the way -- that is why I did

13 this, because it was, like you get a checkbook

14 with that and you make monthly payments. It

15 wasn't you have to pay it all at once.

16 Q. So every month you are reminded about

17 this $10,000 investment that had gone down the

18 drain, and my question to you, sir, is --

19 MR. KRAMER: Was that a question or

20 a color commentary about every month?

21 Q. Is that correct?

22 A. Well, not me, maybe my wife, she pays

23 the bills. I just put it out of my mind, but,

24 yes, I can see what he was saying, it was not me

25 personally.

44

1 Marhoumy


60 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

2 Q. You were aware month to month, sir,

3 that you had to pay the interest, or whatever it

4 is, on the $10,000?

5 A. Yes, I was.

6 Q. And my question to you, sir, is that

7 after those three weeks, and after you started

8 paying monthly that $10,000, your feelings of

9 disbelief about Mr. Damiano's claims of having

10 some connection to Bob Dylan --

11 A. Uh-huh.

12 Q. -- began to resurface?

13 MR. KRAMER: Are you asking him that

14 or are you advising him that?

15 MR. SNYDER: It is a question.

16 A. If you want an answer, I'll give you

17 an answer. I don't think that Jim was the one

18 that made me -- gave me that disbelief. It was

19 Anthony. I think Jim was just maybe lied to, like

20 I was. That is how I perceived it. I took him

21 for a victim just as much as myself. If there was

22 no connection to Mr. Dylan, it wasn't because of

23 what he said to me, it was because of what Anthony

24 said to me.

25 Q. I'm not -- I understand that. We

45

1 Marhoumy


61 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

2 will get to that in a minute.

3 A. You are getting at --

4 Q. I'm not asking about being mad now.

5 I'm asking about not believing, not because Mr.

6 Damiano was lying to you or not lying to you. But

7 not believing the claim that Mr. Damiano had some

8 connection to Bob Dylan. And my question to you,

9 sir, is whether after those three weeks, those

10 feelings of disbelief resurfaced?

11 A. Yes. Yes. It did resurface. Or --

12 and I also had second thoughts about maybe that

13 just the whole thing was a scam, or the whom thing

14 was a scam, or also that this music just got

15 stolen from us, basically just went the way they

16 wanted to go, we paid the money and something else

17 will happen. A million things will go through

18 your head to justify.

19 Q. Sure.

20 A. But at the time, yes, I was upset and

21 the bottom line is we lost track of each other for

22 a few years and I forgot about it.

23 Q. My specific question is whether after

24 those three weeks, you again disbelieved -- I'll

25 rephrase. After those three weeks, you again

46

1 Marhoumy

2 believed that Mr. Damiano really didn't have any


62 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

3 way to get his music to Bob Dylan?

4 A. No, I never disbelieved that because

5 I know what I heard. My wife disbelieved it. She

6 said the whole thing was a lie. I never

7 disbelieved that part. I believed that this music

8 was going to Bob Dylan. I know I believed it in

9 my heart and I still believe it to now. Now maybe

10 they didn't like it, that is a different story.

16 MR. KRAMER: Orin, can we take a

17 half second. My office just paged me.

18 MR. SNYDER: Sure. We are going

19 fast, I know.

20 THE WITNESS: I know, I'm sorry.

21 MR. SNYDER: It's my fault too

22 because I'm talking very quickly.

23 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the video

24 operator. We are off the record. The time

25 is 12:15 p.m.

47

1 Marhoumy

2 (Recess taken)


4 operator, we are back on the record. The

5 time is 12:24 p.m.

6 BY MR. SNYDER:

7 Q. Sir, before we broke you were


63 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

8 testifying that at some point, three or four weeks

9 or later, at your meeting with Mr. Tiller, one of

10 the things you considered was that the whole thing

11 was a scam. Can you tell us what you meant by

12 that?

13 A. That was one of the things that came

14 through my mind. It is possible that it was a

15 scam from -- it could have been a scam. You've

16 got to understand at this time I only knew Jim for

17 a few months. That was one of the possibilities

18 that I thought about. But also I believed, you

19 know, after a while that Jim, there is no possible

20 way that Jim could have been part of that scam

21 because he stayed working for me for a while after

22 that and I learned more what he was going through,

23 it wasn't his fault, it was my fault.

24 Q. What was the specific scam you

25 thought might have been a possibility?

48

1 Marhoumy

2 A. Yes --

3 Q. What kind of scam was it?

4 A. A scam would be something like him

5 and Anthony got together and made me believe that,

6 that could have been a scam, but now I know better

7 because of my relationship afterwards.

8 Q. Sir, so the scam that you thought


64 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

9 might be a possibility is that Mr. Damiano wanting

10 your 10 grand and Mr. -- got together with Mr.

11 Tiller to lie to you about alleged connections

12 with Bob Dylan to get you to invest the $10,000,

13 is that the scam --

14 A. It would have been a good scam if it

15 was done that way, but they didn't want the money,

16 I didn't pay them any money, it was paid to the

17 record company. He wanted to record a record.

18 That is all he wanted is his song produced.

19 Q. The record company you didn't pay any

20 money to, Sony or CBS, the money you paid went to

21 the recording studio?

22 A. To the recording studio.

23 Q. My question to you, sir, is one of

24 the things that crossed your mind three or four

25 weeks after this meeting was that in order the get

49

1 Marhoumy

2 you to pay the 10 grand, Mr. Tiller and Mr.

3 Damiano may have lied to you about their alleged

4 connections with Bob Dylan to get you to pay the

5 10 grand, is that the scam that crossed your mind?

6 A. That is one of the thoughts that came

7 to my mind to justify what I did to myself. I

8 know it is not true.


65 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

9 Q. You know it's not true. How do you

10 know it's not true?

11 A. I know it is not true because of my

12 continuous relationship with Jim.

13 Q. Sir, you have no do you, idea as you

14 sit here today, whether in fact Mr. Tiller has any

15 contact, or ever had any contact what so over with

16 Mr. Dylan, is that correct?

17 A. I don't know for sure.

18 Q. You have no way of knowing that one

19 way or the other, is that correct?

20 MR. KRAMER: Other than the fact

21 that Tiller told him?

22 A. Yes, that's what I was going to say.

23 Based on what he told me, he does. Now I don't

24 know if he really does or not, but based on his

25 words, he does.

50

1 Marhoumy

2 Q. But you know that the record went

3 nowhere?

4 A. I don't know that.

5 Q. Well, sir, you said you know that it

6 wasn't a scam?

7 A. I know it wasn't a scam.

3 Q. Sir, isn't it a fact that your wife

4 told you that the claims about having connections


66 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

5 to Bob Dylan were a lie, isn't that one of the

6 things she told you?

7 A. I wouldn't put it that way. The

8 way -- I know my wife, she believed that he was

9 being lied to, Jim was being lied to.

10 Q. By whom?

11 A. By the people in Sony Records or CBS.

12 Q. Meaning that if people were allegedly

13 telling Mr. Damiano that they can get things to

14 Bob Dylan, that they were in fact lying to him?

15 A. Yes, that's what she believes.

1 Marhoumy

2 Q. Sir, I want to turn now to this

3 meeting that you said happened with Mr. Tiller.

4 Do you remember when that occurred? Your

5 statement says July of '87, is that about when it

6 happened?

7 A. Yeah, I think so.

8 Q. Why don't you tell us where that

9 meeting took place?

10 A. CBS building.

11 Q. Where was that located?

12 A. New York.

13 Q. Do you remember if it was uptown or

14 downtown?

15 A. I don't. I remember getting the CBS


67 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

16 building on the building.

17 Q. Do you remember what the building

18 looked like?

19 A. I don't come to New York often.

20 Q. Was it a silver building or a black

21 building or a gold building?

22 A. I wouldn't guess. Ten years ago, I'm

23 not going to guess. I'm not familiar with the

24 city that much, but I know it was in the CBS

25 building.

54

1 Marhoumy

2 Q. And you and Mr. Damiano went

3 together?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Was anyone else present?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Before going to the meeting, what, if

8 anything, did Mr. Damiano tell you was going to

9 happen at this meeting?

10 A. All the meeting was about is meeting

11 Anthony Tiller to talk about Jim's lyrics.

12 Q. Well, sir, you testified earlier that

13 you were going to meet with Mr. Tiller because you

14 didn't believe Mr. Damiano and you wouldn't invest

15 $10,000 without having more information, is that

16 correct?


68 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

17 A. Yes. I wanted to hear from somebody

18 in that company that Jim's lyrics are being given

19 to somebody important like Bob Dylan.

20 Q. Okay, and what happened when you

21 arrived at the CBS building with Mr. Damiano?

22 A. Okay, now this is ten years ago, but

23 I remember waiting in the lobby for Anthony to

24 come out and we sat there for a while. Jim had

25 his lyrics books with him, one big thick book, and

55

1 Marhoumy

2 we were just sitting there for a while, then

3 Anthony came out. I remember him being in a suit,

4 good-looking like black gentleman, and we went to

5 his office and we just sat down, it was like a big

6 chair, one of these, looked like a recliner kind

7 of chair, but is was like a big chair I was

8 sitting in, and they were acting like they were

9 good friends. I mean talking, hugging, and

10 actually they read some of the lyrics.

11 He had his -- he had Jim's book on

12 his desk and he was reading through it, Jim was

13 pointing out certain lyrics to him, and they were

14 talking and talking and then we got into the

15 conversation about recording this My Cousin

16 Joann tape, and I just wanted to get some feedback


69 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

17 from Anthony based on his position in this company

18 what he believes that, if anything, could happen

19 to this if we produce this, and the feedback I got

20 was absolutely yes, that we got into the Bob Dylan

21 situation, does he read, is he getting Jim

22 Damiano's lyrics, and I remember the answer, yes,

23 he has been reading his lyrics, and I even

24 remember recalling Anthony bringing up Bruce

25 Springsteen's name, and that was just like from

56

1 Marhoumy

2 nowhere, I never heard that before, but it just

3 came up that Jim's lyrics was also given to Bruce

4 Springsteen, which I know who that was, and I

5 remember leaving this meeting with a very good

6 feeling, okay, I was convinced by Anthony if I

7 produce this record, if I pay for it, that it

8 could end up being a very big hit.

9 Q. Okay, sir. And that is basically

10 what happened at the meeting?

11 A. That is basically it. I left there

12 with very good vibes.

13 Q. And if you could tell us what the

14 office looked like in a little more detail, were

15 there records on the wall, were there --

16 A. There were records in the lobby, I

17 know that. There were a bunch of records in the


70 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

18 lobby. I was only in that building that one time.

19 Again, this is ten years ago and I'm trying to

20 recall --

21 Q. Sure.

22 A. -- everything here, which is very

23 hard to do now, but I remember the office being a

24 mess. I remember that. Okay, there was stuff all

25 over his desk, there was stuff on the floor next

57

1 Marhoumy

2 to his desk. I remember that.

3 Q. What kind of stuff, papers?

4 A. It was like, yes papers and like

5 folders and stuff like that all over the place.

6 Q. Do you remember seeing anything on

7 the folders or papers?

8 A. No.

9 Q. And Mr. Damiano told you that Mr.

10 Tiller was involved in A&R activities?

11 A. That is what I believed, that is what

12 I remember.

13 Q. And sir, how large was the office?

14 A. Not a big office. Not a big office.

15 I would say, you know, just a normal size office.

16 Q. Do you remember seeing Mr. Tiller's

17 name on the door?


71 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

18 A. Yes. I think so. I think so. He

19 came out to the lobby and we followed him to his

20 office.

21 Q. Do you know whether Mr. Tiller

22 received any phone calls while you were in his

23 office?

24 A. I don't remember that.

25 Q. What time of day was this?

58

1 Marhoumy

2 A. It was at night. It was at night.

3 It was not in the daytime, it was at night because

4 we went out afterwards to right around the corner

5 to have a drink, and Anthony came with us.

6 Q. By night, you mean evening?

7 A. It was evening. Maybe 8, 9, I don't

8 remember. But it was nighttime.

9 Q. And how long did this meeting last?

10 A. Not long. We were there 20 minutes

11 to half an hour.

12 Q. During the 20 minutes to half hour

13 that you were there, did you see anyone come in to

14 Mr. Tiller's office and talk to him?

15 A. Not that I recall.

16 Q. Did you see whether Mr. Tiller had a

17 secretary?

18 A. I don't recall that either.


72 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

19 Q. You testified that Mr. Tiller was a

20 tall black gentleman.

21 A. He -- I didn't say tall, but he was,

22 yes, I would say maybe 6 foot, something like

23 that.

24 Q. And distinctive features?

25 A. I know he -- no. No. He was like

59

1 Marhoumy

2 a -- trying to remember him.

3 Q. Sure.

4 A. I only met him that one time. I know

5 he was black. I know that. But he was

6 good-looking, like he was very groomed.

7 Q. Uh-huh.

8 A. I know that. He had a suit on.

9 Q. What kind of suit?

10 A. I don't remember.

11 Q. I mean --

12 A. He had a suit.

13 Q. And how old was he, did he appear to

14 be to you?

15 A. He would appear to be either late

16 20's or early 30's.

17 Q. Do you remember his voice?

18 A. Not really.


73 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

19 Q. Do you remember whether he was

20 balding, whether he had --

21 A. No, no, he wasn't balding, he had

22 short hair. He was very groomed, nice, trim.

23 Q. And you testified that during this

24 meeting, Mr. Tiller told you that Bob Dylan had

25 been reading Mr. Damiano's lyrics?

60

1 Marhoumy

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Did he tell you which lyrics he had

4 been reading?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Did he tell you that he had given

7 James Damiano's lyrics to Bob Dylan?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Did he tell you what his relationship

10 was with Bob Dylan?

11 A. No. I don't remember that. But I

12 remember him saying that Jim's lyrics are being

13 given to Bob Dylan.

14 Q. Did he say --

15 A. His relationship with Bob Dylan, I

16 don't remember that.

17 Q. When we met with you, you made a

18 comment --

19 MR. KRAMER: Are you telling him


74 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

20 what he said or are you going to ask him a

21 question?

22 MR. SNYDER: I'll rephrase the

23 question.

24 Q. Do you recall telling us when we met

25 with you about a month ago that Mr. Tiller told

61

1 Marhoumy

2 you that James Damiano's songs were on Mr. Dylan's

3 coffee table?

4 A. Yes, it was something like that.

5 Q. And you understood Mr. Tiller to be

6 saying that he was the one who got the lyrics to

7 Mr. Dylan?

8 A. He is the one -- he gave me the

9 impression that he was getting the lyrics, getting

10 it routed to Dylan somehow.

11 Q. And, sir, during this meeting, sir,

12 you testified that Mr. Tiller said that he also

13 was giving Mr. Damiano's lyrics to Bruce

14 Springsteen?

15 A. What I remember about this part is

16 him bringing up Bruce Springsteen's name and it

17 was connected to Jim Damiano, his lyrics. Now

18 whether he said I'm giving it to Bruce Springsteen

19 or somehow it is getting to Bruce Springsteen, but


75 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

20 it was connected to Jim's lyrics.

21 Q. Do you recall telling us when we met

22 last week that Tony Tiller told you that Bruce

23 Springsteen, like Mr. Dylan, had Mr. Damiano's

24 lyrics?

25 A. Say that again?

62

1 Marhoumy

2 Q. Do you recall when we met with you

3 last month that Tony tiller told you at this

4 meeting that Bruce Springstein, like Bob Dylan,

5 had James Damiano's Lyrics?

6

7 A. Like Bob Dylan, you mean both of

8 them?

9 Q. Yes.

10 A. I remember him saying that Jim

11 Damiano's lyrics were with Bruce Springsteen.

12 Whether he liked them or not, I don't know, but he

13 brought that up. Okay, that came from nowhere

14 because I never even heard Bruce Springsteen, not

15 even from Jim, I never heard that name before.

16 Q. Did Mr. Tiller tell you that Bob

17 Dylan liked Mr. Damiano's lyrics?

18 A. I don't remember that. I remember

19 him saying that he is reading it. He reads it, he

20 has the lyrics now, whether he likes them or not,


76 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

21 I don't remember that.

22 MR. KRAMER: Hold on. Can I hear

23 you play that back.

24 (Record read)

25 MR. SNYDER: Are we on the record?

63

1 Marhoumy

2 MR. KRAMER: Yes. I just wanted

3 something read back.

4 Q. During this meeting was there any

5 discussion about money?

6 A. I may have brought that up. I may

7 have mentioned that I am going to pay for this. I

8 just wanted assurance from somebody that this is

9 the right thing to do.

10 Q. And at this time you understood that

11 Mr. Tiller was a big shot executive at the record

12 company?

13 A. That's what I recall.

14 Q. That is what you understand based on

15 what Mr. Damiano told you?

16 A. Based on what Jim told me and based

17 on the impression I received from Anthony Tiller.

18 Q. Did Mr. Tiller tell you that any

19 other rock superstar was reading Mr. Damiano's

20 lyrics in 1987?


77 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

21 A. The only part I remember is Anthony

22 bringing up Bruce Springsteen's name, which that

23 is all. Now he was connected to Jim's lyrics

24 somehow. I don't recall the exact words.

64

1 Marhoumy

2 I'm going to have to probe that again because you

3 testified a moment ago that you recall Mr. Tiller

4 telling you that Bruce Springsteen also had Jim's

5 lyrics?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Is that correct?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Sir is there anything else that you

10 can recall with specificity that was said at this

11 meeting?

12 A. No, I couldn't comment on that. Not

13 specific words. I decide that the impression that

14 I got after this meeting is I was convinced that

15 Jim, his lyrics and whatever tape that we produce,

16 will end up in Bob Dylan's hands. I was convinced

17 of that. That is the only thing I can tell you

18 about that meeting.

21 Q. Sir, after that meeting you invested

22 $10,000 in this project?

23 A. That is what I recall.

24 Q. Okay. And did you write a check to


78 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

25 Broccoli, studio Broccoli Rabe?

69

1 Marhoumy

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And do you recall the amount of that

4 check?

5 A. That is the part where I said that is

6 what I recall, I'm not exactly sure the amount,

7 but I know I wrote a Platinum American Express

8 check because I just received them.

9 Q. Do you recall that in total you were

10 out about $10,000?

11 A. That is the number that keeps coming

12 to me. I'm not sure exactly to the penny what it

13 is, but that is approximate.

14 Q. Do you have a copy of that check?

15 A. No.

16 Q. And the name of the bank or financial

17 institution that issued the check was American

18 Express Platinum?

19 A. Platinum American Express, yes.

20 Q. Did you enter into a written contract

21 with the studio?

22 A. Yeah, there was a contract.

23 MR. SNYDER: I'm going to ask the

24 court reporter to mark as Defendants'


79 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

25 Exhibit 28, what has been marked as Exhibit

70

1 Marhoumy

2 31 by Mr. Damiano in his production, and it

3 bears Bates stamped numbers 55 through and

4 including 63.

5 (Whereupon, document with Bates

6 stamp numbers 55 through 63 marked

7 Defendants' Exhibit 28 for identification,

8 as of this date.)

9 Q. Do you see that document, sir?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Does that look familiar to you?

12 A. Yeah. That is the contract.

13 Q. This is a copy of the contract

14 pursuant to which you invested in the demo tape,

15 correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And you will see, sir, that the

18 contract is between you and Broccoli Rabe

19 Entertainment Complex, Inc. Was Brian Draigo the

20 owner of that company, do you recall?

21 A. Yes. I remember that name.

22 Q. And I'm directing your attention now

23 to page 6, and you see, sir, there, Brian Draigo's

24 name and signature --

25 A. Uh-huh.


80 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

71

1 Marhoumy

2 Q. As president? Does that refresh your

3 recollection that Brian Draigo was the president of

4 Broccoli Rabe?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And there is an X above your name.

7 Did you actually sign this contract?

8 A. I believe I did.

9 Q. So this could be a conformed copy?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And this contract calls for you to

12 pay $4500 as the grand total in connection with

13 this recording project. Do you see that on page

14 1?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. My question is, if you invested the

17 $10,000, where did the other 5500 go?

18 A. I remember that maybe that is why I

19 didn't sign this particular one. It was redone.

20 We also had to remix. There was -- I know

21 additional fees came back and it came to 10,000,

22 had to remix, we had to do something but it

23 started out at 4500, that is possibly why I didn't

24 sign that one because it was like a preliminary

25 thing and then as it went, because this went on


81 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

72

1 Marhoumy

2 for a while, as it went I had to pay more and

3 more.

4 Q. Do you have a copy of any of the

5 additional subsequent contracts?

6 A. No. I don't even have that one.

7 Q. Do you have a safe, or something in

8 your home where you keep documents?

9 A. This is four addresses ago. I moved

10 three times after this house.

11 Q. Now, you never paid -- withdrawn.

12 Did you pay Mr. Damiano any money

13 directly in connection with this project?

14 A. No.

15 Q. And you of course, sir, didn't pay

16 Mr. Tiller anything in connection with this?

17 A. No, absolutely not.

18 Q. Or CBS Records?

19 A. No.

20 Q. All the monies that you invested went

21 to Broccoli Rabe Studios or Brian Draigo in

22 connection with Broccoli Rabe Studios, is that

23 correct?

24 A. That's right.

25 Q. Okay.

73


82 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1 Marhoumy

2 A. Let me add something to that.

3 Q. Sure.

4 A. At the time we had to record, Jim was

5 in financial strain and I did help him out. He

6 was short money and he was putting a lot of time

7 into this, and I remember helping him some out

8 giving him some cash here and there while we were

9 recording, but that was not much at all it was, a

10 few hundred dollars here and there and that was

11 it.

12 Q. And sir, did you participate in the

13 recording sessions?

14 A. I went maybe twice.

15 Q. Do you recall what songs he recorded?

16 You testified earlier, and I took some notes,

17 hopefully I still have it, that there were eight

18 songs on the tape and one song had no lyrics?

19 A. The one which is My Cousin Joann that

20 had no lyrics, but I'm approximating, about eight

21 songs on the tape. That I still have. If I go

22 through my tapes, I have a few of them. I

23 remember I have a Pain in my Heart because I used

24 to really like that song. I used to love that, I

25 used to listen to it every day. Pain in my Heart.

74


83 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Note: Please see music player above to hear "My Cousin JoAnn" & "Paint in my heart"

1 Marhoumy

2 I don't remember the rest of them. My Cousin

3 Joann, Pain in my Heart, that was a good song I

4 liked myself. There were about eight songs.

5 MR. SNYDER: I'm going to ask you to

6 produce that to us, and before we leave

7 I'll give you a Federal Express envelope,

8 if that's not inconvenient and you can send

9 all of the tapes you have that are Jim

10 Damiano tapes and we will make copies of

11 them, send them back to you and I'll make a

12 copy and give them to Mr. Kramer.

13 THE WITNESS: Okay.

14 Q. You know you have that somewhere in

15 your house?

16 A. Yeah, I'll find those.

17 Q. Do you recall the names of any other

18 songs, you mentioned Pain in my Heart, My Cousin

19 Joann the were recorded during that 1987 session?

20 A. It has been a long time. I haven't

21 listened to it in a few years, no.

22 Q. You were physically present at the

23 recording session several times?

24 A. Yes, I would approximate two times

25 that I was there looking through the glass

Tony Tiller invited my wife and I to parties in the city in which there were other CBS people. Mikie some times


84 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

came to Tony's parties as well: A copy to one of Tony's parties is displayed below.

"For over thirty five years I ( James Damiano) wrote songs and lyrics. Many times lyrics would come to me when I

was in the middle of working. I would however write the lyric down on a piece of paper put it in my pocket and

then throw it in a box when I got home, with the intentions of when I had a little more time I would go into the

box and work on a song.

During discovery my attorney Steven M. Kramer called me and told me he was sending a courier to my home to

pick up the boxes to my original materials and that he would copy them and produce them to the defendants in

response to the Defendants document list.

He told me when he was done that he would return them to me. Mr. Kramer also stated that there was a court

order to do so. I asked him to fax me a copy of the order. After fumbling for words he said that there was none

and that it was ordered from the bench. Then I asked him for a copy of the transcript which orders me to produce

the materials and Mr. Kramer's response was that he didn't have a copy of the transcript.

Kramer then stated that if I refused to give him the materials that the judge would dismiss the law suit, and that

since the defendants had spent (at that time) three million dollars that the judge would probably incarcerate me.

After stating that to me he then said "And you can tell the Judge what ever you want, just don't call me because

I'm going to California and I'm not going to defend you when that happens"

I only had about twenty minutes to decide what to do so I gave the courier approximately fifteen to twenty five

boxes with about four hundred unfinished songs in each box. Bob Dylan's attorney Orin Snyder assembled the

originals in one binder containing four hundred songs and returned those 400 songs to me. The other materials

(The other fifteen to twenty five boxes) were never returned. I later found out that Steven M. Kramer had been an

attorney for CBS / Sony Music who were also Defendants in the law suit. My attorney Robert Church has since

requested to Bob Dylan's lead attorney Orin Snyder that the songs to be returned. Mr. Snyder has since not

replied to Mr. Church's request. Should Dylan's family fifty years from now release those songs as the lost songs

of Bob Dylan they would probably be worth in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Maybe even close to a half a

billion.

After I recorded the material at Broccoli Rabe studios everyone who heard the music thought that it should be on

the radio. Also included on the tape was fast tempo recording of "Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on

James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration) which was compared to Bob Dylan's released version of "Dignity"

in the analysis.

When nothing happened with the music I decided to move back to Charlotte.

I discussed it with Tony ( Tiller) and I could see he was uncomfortable with the idea. I had stopped giving

material to CBS.

I was upset with the fact that CBS was not doing anything with the recorded materials I had just finished.

I drove to Charlotte, found a home and bought it. Came back up New Jersey to prepare to move in a few months.

Tony knew I was serious about moving when one day he called me and said to me that he had to tickets for a Bob

Dylan concert a Jones Beach Theater in Long Island New York.. This conversation was on or about June 15th,

1988. He offered the tickets to me and said "Maybe you could bring some songs with you.

I thought that was an interesting statement and as I was listening to Tony talk trying to keep focused on his words,

his previous words kept ringing in my head "Maybe you could bring some songs with you."


85 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

I was working long hours at the time and had to be at work the following morning. I asked Tony if he knew where

Jones Beach was and he replied "no."

I wasn't sure where Jones Beach was but I knew it was pretty far. I tried to calculate how long it would take me to

drive to the concert, watch the concert, do what ever was going to happen after the concert then drive back home

and get enough rest to be able to get up the following morning for work without being dead tired .

I had no idea what day the concert was so I asked Tony. Tony told me July 1st however I couldn't see a calendar

from where I was sitting. I remember thinking to myself I hope it's on a Saturday night because I could sleep late

Sunday morning. Unfortunately it was a Friday night. When Tony replied "Oh wait a minute here it is, the day is a

on the ticket, it's on a Friday night". I suddenly had to reply to his remark about Friday night and had to stopped

thinking about the statement he made about bringing some songs.

As the conversation progressed I was strongly staring to suspect that I was going to get to meet Dylan that night..

His words kept on ringing in my head "maybe you could bring some songs with you " and realized that his words

were chosen very carefully.

Tony was also being very evasive, nervous, talking a bit faster that his normal self. He knew I was excited about

the statement he made to me but he didn't want to talk about it. I was in a dilemma. I couldn't talk about it yet I

wanted to badly.

I reiterated how tired I would be the next day hoping he would offer more information but he said nothing

pertinent to the situation at hand.

I took a different tact and said 'It's a long ride but if I'm going to get backstage to give Dylan the songs it'll be

worth it. Tony said nothing and just listened.

I asked him what was going to happen when I got there he said "I don't know>" I was trying to get an idea of what

to expect so I said "Will I get to meet Dylan if I go?" Tony replied "Ummm" as if he was thinking.

I waited a while for a response then said "Will I get back stage?" Tony replied "Do you want to try? I then

realized that some thing had been arranged just by the way he was choosing his words.

I could tell how uncomfortable he was with my questioning him. The conversation however continued on for a

while when Tony told me to come to his office to pick up the tickets. I went to get the tickets from Tiller and then

went back home

Mr. Tiller then stated to me that I should bring my songs and to see if I could give them to Bob Dylan. I accepted

the invitation and went to the concert.


86 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

In a sworn deposition when questioned by Plaintiff's attorney Steven M. Kramer, Tony Tiller testified below:

[Tiller deposition page 64 paragraph 6 through par. 15]

By Steven M. Kramer - ...but if you could try to focus on my question, you will have every opportunity, I'm sure

from your skilled counsel to bring out whatever you and he want to bring out.

By Tony Tiller - I will try, but if I can just say one thing, that my relationship with Jim was a friend. Jim and I - - I

considered Jim a very good friend. For my friends I do whatever I can.

Tony Tiller deposition [page 54 para. 20 through page 55 paragraph 14]

By Steven M. Kramer - Let's go back to the Jones Beach concert, if I may, to the time you offered the tickets to

Mr. Damiano, before the concert actually took place.. During that point in time when you offered the tickets to

him and before he actually went to the concert, did you ever say to him or suggest to him that maybe he should

bring some of his songs with him?

By Tony Tiller - No I did not.

By Steven M. Kramer - Any - - all right. Do you deny saying that or is that you just don't recall one way or the

other?

By Tony Tiller - I deny suggesting to Jim that he bring songs along with him. I did, however, concur with him

when he asked me , do you think I should bring my songs with me. I said sure why not, it can't hurt.

Tony Tiller deposition at [page 41 paragraph 4 through paragraph22]

By Steven M. Kramer - Did he tell you he went to the concert?

By Tony Tiller - Yes he did.

By Steven M. Kramer - Did he tell you that he went backstage?


87 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

By Tony Tiller - Yes, he did.

By Steven M. Kramer - Did he tell you of what his experience was when he went backstage?

By Tony Tiller - Yes, he did, and I expressed some surprise that he even got backstage.

By Steven M. Kramer - Wait. You may want to say something, Mr. Tiller, and you have learned counsel on the

other side that will afford you that opportunity if you feel you need it, but I would appreciate it and this will go a

lot quicker if you just restrict your answers to my questions, sir. If I could ask you to do that.

By Steven M. Kramer- - Tell me why you expressed surprise to him, that he had gotten backstage at the Jones

Beach July 1, 1988 concert.

By Tony Tiller - Because from what I heard of backstage. I had never been backstage myself and I would not have

any way of getting backstage. I was rather surprised that he, as he described it, could just, if you will waltz right

backstage.

July, 1st, 1988

On July 1st, 1988 my wife and I drove to the concert. Tony's instruction were to go to the back stage entrance

after the concert. So when I got there I said to my wife let's find the entrance to the back stage so we know where

to go after the show.

After we found the entrance to back stage we found our seats. The concert was sold out. The Alarm was playing.

We were the only two people in our row although there were not any other vacant seats anywhere else in the

amphitheater.

We watched the show. After the show we proceeded to the back stage entrance. There was a guard standing near

the gate and the gate had a pad lock that was locked on it. I went up to the guard and to bring these songs to

Dylan as I held up the package.

The guard who I was no more than three and a half feet away from did not acknowledge one word I said and just

stared at me.

Pam (my wife) and I stood there wondering what was suppose to happen now. Tony's words kept on ringing in my

head "Maybe you could bring some songs, go to the back stage entrance"

We waited a while longer and started to see people walking down a long path coming from the backstage area.

Pam started getting impatient and started saying to me "let's go this is crazy."

I told her to wait. We waited a little while longer when she said it again "Let's go". I said "No let's wait."

The guard heard Pam saying "let's go". A couple minutes later a tour bus started driving out from back stage. That

was it for Pam and she adamantly stated "Come on let's go home.

I looked at the guard and asked him "Is that Dylan's bus?" He then decided to talk and said "No it's the opening

acts bus, the Alarm."

A few minutes after the guard's statement about the bus It started to rain. Pam said "let's go home" I said "No" and

Pam said "Well then at least let's go the umbrella in the car." I said "OK" and we started to walk toward the car.

We took a couple steps and I looked back one last time and saw the guard unlock the gate to the back stage area.


88 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

I put the envelope of songs under my jacket and said to Pam that the guard just unlocked the gate. Pam said "So

what, I don't care, let's go, this is ridiculous." I said "No let's go back stage." She said "No" again. I turned around

and started walking back toward the gate and Pam followed me."

The guard obviously saw us walk through the gate. As we were walking down the path the guard who was now in

his blazer with security lights on it was backing up very slowly watching us walk down the path to back stage.

We saw another fence in the distance. When we approached it we saw that it was open. We walked through the

second gate and saw a platform. I sat down and asked Pam to watch out for Dylan. I started going through the

songs to be sure I had what I thought were the best on top of the pile.

As I started going through them I stopped and said to Pam "Make sure you look out for Bob" A few minutes later

a man came out from a door that led to back stage. Walked passed Pam came over to me looked down at my face.

I stopped and looked up at his. He then walked back past Pam and back into the door he came out of.

A few minutes later a group of people came out. I didn't even look up. I was almost positive it would take Dylan

much longer to come out but I was wrong.

I heard Pam say something. I was still going through the songs. I asked her what she said. She replied "There's

Bob" I looked up and saw Dylan with his foot on the bottom step of the bus almost ready to get on.

I stood up and froze staring Dylan in the eyes. I was a few feet from the back of the bus. Dylan was at the door to

the bus. We were maybe thirty feet away from each other. I waited for him to make a move. He started walking

toward me and I toward him.

All the people who came out of the door with Dylan were now gathered around us and watching this take place.

When I was within arms reach I held out the envelope of songs to him and tried to say "Tony Tiller told me to

bring you these songs " However the only words I had time to say were "Tony Tiller."

No sooner than me saying to Dylan "Tony Tiller", did the big man who initially came out from the back stage

door, swing his hand down and said "hold it.' I looked up at him. He asked me," Who told you to bring these

songs" but before I could answer, this same man pointed at a man to my left, and said "Give them to him".

Ironically, no sooner did the man say "Give them to him" did the man to my left grab the envelope and rudely

started pulling on it. I looked him square in the eyes and wouldn't let go. We both pulled for a couple seconds

when the man stopped pulling and politely said "I'm sorry who told you to bring these songs. I replied "Tony

Tiller at CBS Records." and let go.

I immediately looked back at Dylan. Dylan nodded to me, turned around and walked back to the bus everyone

else followed. The door shut and the bus drove away.

Produced in this litigation were copies of the ticket stubs to the Bob Dylan Jones Beach concert.

Pamela Damiano testified to under oath in a video tape deposition. Questions asked by Orin Snyder (Bob Dylan's

attorney). Pamela Damiano - Deposition - Pages 80 -82

23 Q. Now I have some documents that I

24 would like to show you. Before I show you the

25 documents, why don't you tell us what happened


89 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

80

1 P. Damiano

2 after the concert, as best as you can recall, on

3 July 1, 1988?

4 A. Right.

5 Q. At Jones Beach?

6 A. Right, okay, we -- the concert

7 finished. We walked outside. We walked over

8 towards a, what seemed like a gate over to the

9 side. The gate was locked. It was raining.

10 Started raining. There was a guard that came up

11 to the gate, and after that it seemed like the

12 gate had been unlocked. We walked through this

13 gate, walked down a long -- seemed like a long

14 roadway that led around to the back of the stage

15 area. When we walked back there, we were the only

16 two back there. There was a platform, like a

17 wooden platform that we sat down on and Jim

18 started to go through his various lyric pages

19 putting the best ones he felt on top, and I stood

20 there, I stood up.

21 And at that point, someone, a man

22 walked out of the back door, looked at us, looked

23 at Jim, looked at I, and then he turned around and

24 walked back in this back door, and then the door

25 opened again and a group of people walked out the

81


90 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1 P. Damiano

2 back door, and as they started to walk, I looked

3 up and I recognized a person, Bob Dylan, and I

4 said to Jim, "There he is, there's Bob." And at

5 that time, he was up to about the first step to

6 the bus, the tour bus that they were walking to,

7 and he stopped before he got onto the bus and took

8 a step onto the bottom step, looked back at us.

9 And by that time Jim had stood up,

10 started to walk over towards him. Mr. Dylan

11 started to walk back, and another person walked in

12 between the two of them and put down his hand, his

13 arm, and then it seemed like, I couldn't hear

14 exactly what was being said, but it seemed like

15 someone said, you know, what are you doing here or

16 what is this, and Jim handed the book, started to

17 hand the book to him, and then someone else came

18 over and took the lyric, whether it was a book or

19 an envelope with the lyrics in it, took this

20 package and walked towards the bus along with the

21 other people, and they all got onto the bus. The

22 door closed and the bus drove away.

Orin Snyder - Backstage on July 1st?

Pamela - Yes

Orin Snyder - You testified that you freely walked backstage, is that correct?

Pamela - Correct


91 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1.

Orin Snyder - No one stopped you?

Pamela - No one stopped us no.

Click here to review documents produced to Orin Snyder of Parcher Hayes & Snyder during discovery.

Through discovery a few months after the Jones Beach concert Bob Dylan went to Atlanta Georgia to record

"Dignity" which was the hit song off the C.D.

On August 5th 1988 I recieved an unsigned typed letter from Bob Dylan's office displayed below

The envelope which contained the letter is displayed below

The Musical comparative Analysis of "Dignity" was prepared By Doctor Greene who graduated from Harvard

University (Magna Cum Laude).

The musical score below is a comparative analysis of the melody line of a song released by Bob Dylan titled

"Dignity" and a song written by James Damiano also titled "Dignity".


92 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Bob Dylan's copyright registration for "Dignity" was dated December of 1991. James Damiano's copyright

registration for "Dignity" was 1982 and 1988, nine and three years before Bob Dylan copyrighted "Dignity".

This analysis was prepared by Doctor Greene who graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard University. Doctor

Greene's analysis was corroborated by a professor of music at Julliard School of Music, Sebastian Courier and

also by Jon Bon Jovi's piano teacher Harold Frazee.

Bob Dylan offered no credible rebuttal to this analysis. For the purpose of comparison the notes have been

changed to numbers In this analysis Doctor Greene explains that the notes (2) & (3) are just accompaniments of

(1) when the note (2) or (3) precedes the note (1). So it would make no difference if Dylan used a (2) note or a

(3) note, theoretically the (2) note or (3) note in reference to this melody line can be considered the same note.

Also given that it would have been basically simple for Bob Dylan to leave one note out of the melody line one

can consider that fifteen out of fifteen notes in this melody line are in consecutive order. The limit a person can

legally copy is six notes. Seven notes legally constitutes infringement.

Professor Doctor Boris of Morris County College calculated the odds to be over a trillion to one that James

Damiano and Bob Dylan wrote this same melody line independently of one another. Doctor Boris also opined

that these odds are the same odds as hitting the New Jersey million dollar lottery a million times consecutively.

Judge Jerome B. Simandle wrote in his opinion of December 1996, "To the ear of this court, there is no

substantial similarity in the structure, instrumentation or melody of the two songs." Judge Simandle has no formal

education in music theory. Doctor Green who not only has a doctorate in music theory but graduated Magna Cum

Laude from Harvard University.

Click on the text below to review a diaghram of the musical notes written by Doctor Greene.

"Dignity" was nominated for a Grammy. "Dignity" was also the only newly written original song released by Bob

Dylan in a span of seven years from 1990 to 1997. All other songs released by Bob Dylan in that seven-year span

were traditional folk songs and songs taken from songs in the public domain. In a New York Times interview with

Bob Dylan the article read "Long time fans fretted that Dylan was not releasing new material in concert" When

asked why he had not released a new song in seven years Dylan responded: "I don't like to introduce new material

into the media because of the bootleg situation". Insinuating someone might steal his song.

I believe no credits to the authors of the songs Dylan recorded on his CD's between 1990 and 1997 were listed on

his CD or CD cover. Nor was there any reference to the authorï¿½s name. It is doubtful Dylan paid any royalties

to the families of the deceased or living authors of those songs. "To the ear of this court, there is no substantial

similarity in the structure, instrumentation or melody of the two songs.

Dr. Green faxed the following letter to Plaintiff referring To Plaintiffï¿½s 1982 copyright registration:

Two months after the Jones Beach concert Tony Tiller called me and asked me if I had any more songs that I

could give Dylan. I told him that I had some songs that were not as of yet typed up but that I could copy some of

them real fast by hand if I had to. Tony then told me that Dylan was playing at Waterloo Village in Byram, New

Jersey and that if I wanted to go to the concert that he would get me tickets. I told him that I would go since it

was so close to where I was living.

After asking me how many tickets I wanted Tony told me that he would call me back to let me know where to

pick up the tickets. I called a friend of mine Brad Wright and asked him if he wanted to go. He told me that he

was going to go anyway and that he had tickets for he and his girlfriend Sandy. Brad told me that he would drive

over to my apartment, and we would all go together. When Brad and Sandy arrived I was on the phone with

Tony. Tony told me to go to the will call window where there would be four complimentary tickets.


93 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Brad, Sandy, Pam, and I drove to the concert and picked up the tickets. The seats were seven rows back on the

center isle. After the concert we followed Tony Tillers instructions to go backstage. The following transcript is

what Brad Wright testified to in his deposition and under oath. Deposed by Orin Snyder, Bob Dylan's attorney

Brad testified the following:

August 5th, 1988

I received a letter from Bob Dylan's publisher stating:

We are sorry to inform you that we are no longer accepting songs for review. Enclosed please find the return of

your material. Sincerely, Bob Dylan office.

Produced in this litigation was a copy of the letter and the envelope, which enclosed the letter. A copy of the

envelope, which enclosed the letter, is displayed below.

Plaintiff has learned through discovery that this letter came from Jeff Rosen's office. Jeff Rosen is Bob Dylan's

publisher.

August 5th, 1988 I also received on the same day August 5th, 1988 a letter from CBS Associated Labels a letter

stating Dear Damiano:

Thanks for sending me the enclosed. I've listened to a number of times and my decision is to pass. I just don't feel

it's right for us at this time. May I wish you every success and thanks for thinking of us.

Sincerely L___P___S____

A copy of this letter is displayed below:

Two months after the Jones Beach concert Tony Tiller called me and asked me if I had any more songs that I

could give Dylan. I told him that I had some songs that were not as of yet typed up but that I could copy some of

them real fast by hand if I had to. Tony then told me that Dylan was playing at Waterloo Village in Byram, New

Jersey and that if I wanted to go to the concert that he would get me tickets. I told him that I would go since it

was so close to where I was living.

After asking me how many tickets I wanted he told me that he would call me back to let me know where to pick

up the tickets. I called a friend of mine Brad Wright and asked him if he wanted to go. He told me that he was

going to go anyway and that he had tickets for he and his girlfriend Sandy. Brad told me that he would drive over

to my apartment, and we would all go together. When Brad and Sandy arrived I was on the phone with Tony.

Tony told me to go to the will call window to pick up the tickets, there were four complimentary tickets.

Brad, Sandy, Pam, and I drove to the concert and picked up the tickets. The seats were seven rows back . My seat

was row G seven rows back from the stage center isle. After the concert we followed Tony Tillers instructions to

go backstage.

The guards saw us approaching, they moved to the side and let us walk right on through to the back stage area.

Brad had an envelope of my songs in his hand.

We walked down a path to Dylan's bus. Brad knocked on the door and a man came off the bus and introduces

himself as Mike Reed. Brad and I shook his hand. After the handshakes Mike looked down at the envelope and

asked Brad "Are those for me?". Brad answered "yes" and started to hand Mike the songs. But before Mike could

grab them I took the songs out of Brad's hand. Mike suddenly looked at me. with a confused expression.

I then asked Mike "Why doesn't Dylan come down and get the songs?" Mike thought for a moment and replied


94 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

"Bob already left" I then asked mike "why should I give you the songs?" and He didn't know how to answer me, or

what to say. I was trying to decide whether I should leave the songs with him, when Brad asked Mike if Dylan

would give him his autograph.

Mike replied that Dylan does not give autographs. As Mike and Brad were talking I was trying to decide what to

do so I opened the book of lyrics to a page that read:

Doesn't seem like a man

Who would beat you but

I guess you never know

People do whatever it takes

To get what they want

So quick to put on a show

And there's a reason for

Everything in this world

Hit me high or hit me low

Might seem like a cynical

Attitude but someday

You'll reap what you sow

And I never met a man who

Could afford to be honest

Have to have

Those essential luxuries

Faith is your reason

Belief your purpose

Don't tell me you didn't know Damiano / copyright

After Mike Reed read the songs we talked for a little longer. When the conversation between Mike, Brad and me

ended Mike entered the bus with the envelope in his hand.

{Mike Reed was never deposed in this litigation}

[Ticket stubs to this concert have been produced in this litigation .]

The following transcript is what Brad Wright testified to in his deposition and under oath. Please note: All


95 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

depositions besides Plaintiff's are video taped:

Deposed by Orin Snyder, Bob Dylan's attorney part of what Brad testified to under oath is transcribed below.

Page's 105 through 110.

6 Q. Did you attend a Bob Dylan concert in

7 Waterloo Village -- at Waterloo Village in Byram,

8 New Jersey?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. In September of 1988?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Is that September 10, 1988?

13 A. I would have to look at the ticket

14 stub.

15 Q. Sound about right?

16 A. It sounds about right.

17 Q. Okay. That is what you said in your

18 statement, that is the date you give?

19 A. Okay. I'm not sure, plus or minus

20 somewhat.

21 Q. Did anyone else attend that concert

22 with you?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Who was that?

25 A. Pam Damiano and Sandy Miller.

75

1 Wright

2 Q. At the time was Sandy Miller your

3 girlfriend?


96 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

25 Q. So you met -- Sandy and you had the

82

1 Wright

2 tickets before the concert, correct? Waterloo we

3 are talking about.

4 A. We had our two tickets.

5 Q. And what, if anything, happened with

6 regard to Mr. Damiano before this concert?

7 A. He was on the phone with somebody, I

8 could only hear and I don't remember his

9 conversation, but it was -- but he was talking

10 about the tickets and there will be tickets, he

11 were trying to get four tickets for the show.

12 Q. Let's back up,

13 A. For the Waterloo show.

14 Q. Let's back up.

15 A. Sure.

16 Q. Did there come a time when Mr.

17 Damiano called you about the Waterloo concert?

18 A. I'm not sure who called whom.

19 Q. At some point you and he started

20 talking about the Waterloo concert?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. What happened next with regard to you

23 and he going to the Waterloo concert together?

24 A. Well, I think I was already planning

25 on going because I had my tickets already when I


97 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

83

1 Wright

2 got to Jimmy's house, I know I had my tickets

3 already, so --

4 Q. So there came a time when you went to

5 Mr. Damiano's show?

6 A. Before the show. He was planning on

7 going too.

8 Q. Was that on the day of the show?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And you went to his house for the

11 purpose of going to the show together?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. At the time he was trying to get four

14 tickets to the show?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. You already had two tickets?

17 A. Right.

18 Q. And he was going to get four to give

19 you two on the theory that maybe he could get

20 better tickets?

21 A. That may have been his thinking at

22 the time.

23 Q. What happened next?

24 A. Well, when we got to the show, he

25 went to the window and there were four tickets


98 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

84

1 Wright

2 theyï¿½re for him.

3 Q. Did you and Sandy and Pam and Mr.

4 Damiano go to the concert?

5 A. We walked in, yes, we did go to the

6 concert. I didn't know how good his seats were,

7 so me and Sandy kept the tickets that we

8 originally had, which I -- I wish I didn't do that

9 because his seats were much better.

10 Q. Because you could have scalped them

11 and taken his?

12 A. I could have scalped mine, but

13 instead I did opposite, get some money for Pam.

14 But they were not going to sell them. I said,,p. 15 "Pam, why don't I try to sell these for you," and,p. 16 she

liked the idea, and so I went back to the line,

17 and I sold them for face value and -- I didn't

18 scalp them. Face value and I gave the money to

19 Pam.

20 Q. You sold your two tickets that you

21 had previously bought?

22 A. No. I wish I did that. I sold two

23 of the tickets that he received at the window.

24 Q. I see, and you sat in your seats?

25 A. Yes.

85

1 Wright


99 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

2 Q. And they sat in their seats?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Where were your seats?

5 A. Way off to the left of the stage.

6 Very corner left, and it was maybe a dozen rows

7 back or something.

8 Q. On the floor?

9 A. Yes. It is under the tent.

10 Q. And how did it come that you scalped

11 theyï¿½re two as opposed to your two?

12 A. Well, I think I said I wasn't sure

13 how good his seats were. I don't know what I was

14 thinking at the time, whether I got my tickets

15 earlier and maybe they were better, but I sold

16 there two tickets. I wish I didn't because they

17 had much nicer seats.

18 Q. Do you remember how much you got for

19 the two tickets?

20 A. No. It was face value. Whatever it

21 was. I don't know.

22 Q. Okay. As you were selling the

23 tickets for face value --

24 A. Because they had them at the box

25 office. They were not sold out.

86

1 Wright

2 Q. Sure, I understand. As you were


100 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

3 selling the tickets, you then watched the concert

4 from your seats?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Off on the side and Mr. Damiano and

7 Mrs. Damiano sat --

8 A. With the other two people, the couple

9 that I sold the tickets to. They said, "Excellent

10 seats, thanks."

11 Q. What, if anything, did Mr. Damiano

12 tell you about where he got the four seats on the

13 night in question?

14 A. Okay.

15 Q. And when I say on the night in

16 question, I'm asking you to tell us whether you

17 remember if he said anything to you about where he

18 got the tickets on the night in question as

19 opposed to some other time?

20 A. I remember him being on the phone in

21 the kitchen about 15, 20 minutes talking to some

22 guy about the tickets, and I only know he said the

23 guy's name, Anthony Tiller, but he didn't -- I

24 mean that's all I know.

25 Q. Okay. And do you remember where Mr.

87

1 Wright

2 Damiano's seats were?


101 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

3 A. They were I would say pretty much on

4 center, maybe six rows back, maybe more, maybe

5 less. They were nice seats.

6 Q. And was the theater full that

7 evening?

8 A. It was pretty full. It was a tent.

9 The tent was full.

10 Q. Do you remember what the weather was?

11 A. I know we were under the tent. So if

12 it was raining, it wasn't -- we were not affected

13 by it. If it was raining. I have been to shows,

14 I tried to think of this before, I have been to

15 shows there where it has been raining, but I don't

16 know if it was this one or not. It could have

17 been raining.

18 Q. Now prior to concert, what, if

19 anything, did Mr. Damiano tell you about why he

20 was going to the concert?

21 A. We had a book of songs that Jimmy

22 composed and we were going to give them to Bob. I

23 was going to meet Bob.

24 Q. You were going to meet Bob?

25 A. Yes. I was hoping to.

88 1 Wright

2 Q. And why don't you tell us about what

3 caused you to hope that you were going to meet Bob

4 that night?


102 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

5 A. Well, when I sold the tickets at the

6 window, I was pretty sure I was going to meet Bob

7 that night.

8 Q. Why is that?

9 A. Because he was -- he got -- he said

10 we were going to.

11 Q. Mr. Damiano told you he was going to

12 meet Bob?

13 A. We are going to give songs to Bob,

14 yes.

15 Q. Did he tell you, sir, that he had a

16 date with Mr. Dylan?

17 A. No, no, I still believe it when I see

18 it, I had that kind of an attitude.

19 Q. My question is what did Mr. Damiano

20 tell you about what was going to happen?

21 A. Well, we had a manila yellow envelope

22 with songs in it and a demo tape of Another

23 Justification and we were going to give that to

24 Bob.

25 Q. My question to you, sir, is, what did

89

1 Wright

2 Mr. Damiano tell you about what was going to

3 happen after the concert, before the concert

4 ended?


103 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

5 A. That was the whole plan, that we were

6 going to meet with Bob and give him the songs and

7 see what he thinks.

8 Q. This was something he told you was

9 going to happen as opposed to something that he

10 hoped would happen?

11 A. Yes, I don't know which, I kind of

12 hoped and he thought it was more than hope. You

13 know, more.

14 Q. Did he tell you why he believed that

15 he was going to meet Mr. Dylan after the concert

16 at Waterloo Village on September 10, 1988?

17 MR. KRAMER: Objection to the form

18 of the question.

19 A. Why did he believe -- no, I got the

20 impression somehow but I'm not sure.

21 Q. Well, sir, did he tell you he and Mr.

22 Dylan had spoken on the telephone and arranged to

23 meet backstage after the concert?

24 A. Not him and Dylan, no.

25 Q. Did he tell you that Mr. Dylan sent

90

1 Wright

2 him a letter beforehand arranging to meet him

3 backstage after the concert?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Did he tell you that Mr. Dylan's


104 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

6 manager and he had spoken and arranged for Mr.

7 Damiano to meet Mr. Dylan backstage after the

8 concert?

9 A. Not exactly in those words, but if

10 Anthony Tiller is his manager, that -- I don't

11 know.

12 Q. What --

13 MR. KRAMER: Keep your voice up.

14 Q. What impression, sir, did you have

15 before you went backstage about what was going to

16 happen?

17 A. I was under the impression that we

18 were going to meet -- that we were going to

19 finally -- I was finally going to meet with Bob

20 Dylan.

21 MR. KRAMER: Try to keep it at that

22 level.

23 THE WITNESS: Sorry.

24 MR. KRAMER: That's okay.

25 Q. Sir, what did Mr. Damiano tell you,

91

1 Wright

2 as best you can remember, that led you to believe

3 that you were finally going to meet Bob Dylan

4 backstage at Waterloo on September 10, 1988? Not

5 the exact words but what in substance did he tell


105 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

6 you?

7 A. It wasn't so much what he told me.

8 It was when we got there and the tickets -- we got

9 the four tickets at the window and I was under the

10 impression Jimmy was on the level with me. I

11 didn't know if all he was saying was true or not.

12 Q. On the level about what?

13 A. About that we are going to meet with

14 Bob.

15 Q. And you said all that he was saying.

16 What was he saying about what would happen

17 backstage?

18 A. Well, just all the stuff that -- oh

19 boy. All the stuff that he would say I would just

20 take as anybody saying, rambling on, and when I

21 listened to him and I never really totally

22 believed it.

23 Q. What was -- sir, what I'm trying to

24 establish is what it is that he was saying when he

25 was rambling on.

92

1 Wright

2 A. That we were going to meet with Bob.

3 In no time we are going to sit down and he is

4 going to sit down and write with him.

5 Q. Fine. And did he tell you how he

6 came to believe that?


106 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

7 A. Not so much telling, but if he told

8 me anything, I was under the impression that he

9 was working with people that were very close to

10 Bob.

11 Q. Did Mr. Damiano tell you, in

12 substance, that he was working with people very

13 close to Bob which would enable him after this

14 concert to sit down with Bob Dylan?

15 A. I certainly got that impression.

16 Whether he told me or how I got the impression,

17 I'm not sure. I can't remember.

18 Q. You got that impression from words

19 that you had with Mr. Damiano?

20 A. Yes. I can't remember exactly how.

21 Q. Do you remember whether he told you

22 what position Mr. Tiller had?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Did you believe before going

25 backstage that Mr. Tiller was someone who was, as

93

1 Wright

2 you said, close to Bob Dylan?

3 A. At the time I didn't believe

4 anything. Unless I see it myself.

5 Q. I understand. My question was a bad

6 one. Did Mr. Damiano tell you, in substance, that


107 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

7 Mr. Tiller was close to Bob Dylan?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Do you remember what he said about

10 that subject?

11 A. No. I know they talked on the phone.

12 I remember he mentioned Anthony Tiller a number of

13 times to me.

14 Q. And when he mentioned Anthony Tiller

15 a number of times to you, was that at about the

16 same time, 1988?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. What did he say when he mentioned

19 Anthony Tiller?

20 A. Oh boy, just he was working with him

21 and he is giving Anthony his music, giving music

22 that he wrote to Tiller and hoped it would get him

23 somewhere.

24 Q. Did Mr. Damiano tell you in substance

25 that Tony Tiller had arranged for him to go

94

1 Wright

2 backstage after Waterloo to meet with Bob Dylan?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. You said you were carrying a manila

5 yellow envelope which contained written lyrics

6 plus a demo tape of Another Justification?

7 A. Yes.


108 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

8 Q. Do you remember which lyrics were

9 contained on the pieces of paper in the envelope?

10 A. No.

11 Q. How many songs were in the envelope?

12 A. I would say (indicating) a stack

13 about a quarter-inch thick.

14 Q. Were any of them titled, sir, or were

15 these the poems that were untitled?

16 A. I can't remember for sure.

17 MR. KRAMER: Objection to the form

18 of the question.

19 Q. Who was carrying the manila envelope

20 during the concert?

21 A. During the concert he was carrying

22 it.

23 Q. And what, if anything, did he tell

24 you about what was in the envelope?

25 A. I knew what was in the envelope.

95

1 Wright

2 Q. How did you know that?

3 A. I knew that they were songs

4 beforehand. That is why we brang them.

5 Q. What, if anything --

6 MR. SNYDER: Withdrawn.

7 Q. Did Mr. Damiano tell you before this


109 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

8 concert that he had already met with Mr. Dylan?

9 A. I believed there was a time, I

10 believe it was before but I'm not absolutely sure.

11 Q. Well, sir, did you believe that when

12 you were going to meet Bob Dylan after the

13 concert, that Mr. Damiano and Mr. Dylan already

14 had a relationship of some sort?

15 A. Did I believe it?

16 Q. Well, was that something that Mr.

17 Damiano said to you.

18 A. Yes, he said it, but did I believe

19 it? No.

20 Q. What did he say to you about a

21 preexisting relationship between Mr. Dylan and Mr.

22 Damiano?

23 A. Not that there was much of a

24 relationship, if any, but he wanted -- his goal

25 was to sit down and write with Bob.

96

1 Wright

2 Q. My question is, what, if anything,

3 did Mr. Damiano tell you at this concert about

4 whether he and Mr. Dylan had already sat down

5 together?

6 A. Yes, that's right, I remember Pam

7 even telling me the night before, the night of the

8 show before we went, she was telling me something


110 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

9 about meeting with Bob, so yes, it was that they

10 had met before the show so they did talk about it,

11 that they met before.

12 MR. SNYDER: Let's take a half an

13 hour.

14 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are off the

15 record. The time is 12:40.

16 (Lunch recess: 12:40 p.m.)

97

1 Wright

2 Afternoon Session

3 1:22 p.m.

4 B R A D L E Y C H A R L E S W R I G H T,

5 previously sworn, resumed:

6 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Back on the

7 record. Tape number 2. The time is 1:22.

8 We are on the record.

9 BY MR. SNYDER:

10 Q. Sir, before lunch we were talking

11 about Waterloo and the events that allegedly

12 occurred there.

23 Q. You were talking about the manila

24 envelope and you testified that contained in the

25 manila envelope you were holding at Waterloo was a

98


111 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1 Wright

2 demo of Another Justification and about a

3 quarter-inch thick worth of lyrics?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Do you as you sit here today know

6 what a single lyric was in that manila folder?

7 A. Not a one.

8 Q. Do you know whether in fact there was

9 anything printed on the documents?

10 A. Yes, I saw them, yes.

11 Q. You saw printed words on a page?

12 A. Printed words on a page.

13 Q. But you have absolutely no idea what

14 those words are?

15 A. Correct.

16 MR. KRAMER: You don't mean printed,

17 I assume, printed as in --

18 THE WITNESS: Typed.

19 MR. KRAMER: Or do you --

20 A. They were typed.

21 Q. Typed or handwritten?

22 A. They were typed.

23 Q. And the songs that were on Another

24 Justification were what?

25 A. I can remember My Cousin Joanne, and

99

1 Wright


112 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

2 Bury Me in New York City, and if you were to go

3 over some, I would remember if you would say the

4 names, maybe I would remember.

5 Q. And, sir, you were -- the tape that

6 you have at home, Another Justification, that you

7 are going to send to us for copying is a copy of

8 the same tape that you had with you that night?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Okay. What happened at the end of

11 the concert?

12 A. Well, walked back to where Jim was

13 sitting, and me and Sandy met with Jimmy and Pam

14 and the guy, the couple that I sold the tickets to

15 that were sitting next to Jimmy and Pam, and he

16 said, "Thank you, excellent seats," and I said

17 "Yes, great."

18 Q. Too bad you didn't enjoy them.

19 A. So we walked backstage with the

20 envelope and then at this time I took the

21 envelope. And we walked, I say backstage, it's

22 all outside, so we walked behind the curtains to

23 the left of the stage facing it and we walked by

24 two bodyguards, big guys, and they just parted and

25 they just made way for us as we walked up to the

100

1 Wright


113 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

2 bus. Maybe the bus was like in back.

3 Q. And sir, you didn't actually go on

4 stage, you are saying you went to the left around

5 the stage?

6 A. Yes. It is all outside so the only

7 stage is the stage where they perform on and

8 everything else is pretty much outside.

9 Q. How many security guards did you see?

10 A. I saw two.

11 Q. And you said they parted?

12 A. They let us go. We didn't actually

13 walk between them but we walked right by. They

14 didn't question us or anything. But they did see

15 us.

16 Q. And who went backstage, you, Pamela

17 Damiano?

18 A. Me, Pam, Jim and Sandy.

19 Q. And --

20 A. We walked back past the guards and up

21 to the bus, but the girls didn't follow us right

22 up to the bus.

23 Q. Other than you four, were other

24 people going backstage?

25 A. No.

101

1 Wright

2 Q. Did you see whether other people


114 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

3 attempted to go backstage?

4 A. I didn't see whether they attempted

5 or not.

6 Q. When you were backstage, what did you

7 see?

8 A. There was a bus.

9 Q. Can you describe the bus?

10 A. It was big. It was big like a

11 charter type.

12 Q. Just one bus?

13 A. Just one bus.

14 Q. Any trucks?

15 A. There were trucks.

16 Q. Any other people backstage?

17 A. Not that I recall.

18 Q. Just you four and the bus?

19 A. Yes, that were -- backstage, yes,

20 behind the stage, yes. Right up next to the bus,

21 me and Jim were the ones that walked up to the

22 bus.

23 Q. But when you were backstage in that

24 area, you didn't see any technicians or --

25 A. If there were, they were off in the

102

1 Wright

2 distance and I wasn't paying attention. It was a


115 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

3 handful of people if there was.

4 Q. Were there people backstage beyond

5 you four or not that you saw?

6 A. I didn't recognize -- I mean I

7 remember the two guards I do remember.

8 Q. What did they look like?

9 A. They were big guys, both white and --

10 that is about all I can tell you. Big strapping

11 looking dudes.

12 Q. Did any one of your group of four

13 have any words or verbal exchange with the guards?

14 A. Not that I'm aware of.

15 Q. And at what point did you take

16 possession of this manila folder?

17 A. Right before we started to walk

18 backstage.

19 Q. Why did you take possession of it?

20 A. I'm not sure.

21 Q. Did Jim ask you to?

22 A. I'm not sure exactly how I came to

23 hold the songs.

24 Q. Was it something that you wanted to

25 be doing at that time?

103

1 Wright

2 A. I didn't think of it one way or the

3 other.


116 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

4 Q. Well, was there a specific reason

5 that you came to hold them as opposed to Jim?

6 A. I think Jim was nervous, very nervous

7 at the time, and I believe he gave them to me to

8 hold.

9 Q. Did he tell you he was nervous?

10 A. No. No, but -- no. He didn't tell

11 me that.

12 Q. Did you perceive him to be acting in

13 a nervous manner?

14 A. Yes. But then again, I often get

15 that impression from Jim.

16 Q. What was he doing that made him

17 appear nervous to you?

18 A. Just seems like his nature. Maybe it

19 is me, I'm so calm, I don't know.

20 Q. What do you mean by that?

21 A. I don't know. I don't know, I guess

22 if you met Jim, you should know what I'm talking

23 about.

24 Q. Okay. So, you got backstage and it

25 is you four and you saw this bus?

104

1 Wright

2 A. Saw the bus.



117 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

4 A. Me and Jim walked up to the bus,

5 knocked on it. Now the girls, they stayed behind.

6 They were maybe 20 yards away, maybe 20 yards,

7 maybe 30, and they were just talking to

8 themselves, and me and Jim knocked on the bus, one

9 of us knocked on the bus, I'm not sure.

10 Q. And did you have any discussion about

11 knocking on the bus?

12 A. No. No. I just can't remember who

13 knocked on the bus.

14 Q. Do you remember why one of you were

15 knocking on the bus?

16 A. We were sure Bob was on the bus, and

17 Bob was only off the stage now 15 minutes and we

18 were sure that Bob was going to come down and we

19 were going to meet with Bob and give him the

20 songs.

21 Q. And what happened next?

22 A. And then the other guy, the driver

23 got off the bus.

24 Q. How did you know he was the driver?

25 A. He told us.

105

1 Wright

2 Q. He told you he was the driver?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Of the bus?


118 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Why don't you tell us exactly what

7 happened after you knocked on the door.

8 A. He came off the bus --

9 Q. He came off --

10 MR. KRAMER: Can we now just hear

11 his answer.

12 Go ahead.

13 A. The guy came off the bus and I asked

14 him if Bob is on the bus. I wanted his autograph

15 And he says Bob doesn't give autographs, and I

16 remember him saying his last name, I remember

17 asking him if he is any relation to Lou Reed and

18 he said no. That is how I'm sure his last name is

19 Reed. His first name is Mike, from what I

20 understand.

21 Q. But you remember it being Reed right

22 now?

23 A. I remember it being Reed for sure. I

24 remember asking if he was any relation to Lou.

25 Q. Did you ask him what his name was or

106

1 Wright

2 did he offer his name?

3 A. I can't think for sure.

4 Q. Okay. What happened next?


119 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

5 A. I was pretty sure that Bob was on the

6 bus. Don't ask me how. I'm sure I was just, you

7 know, hoping I guess a lot of it was, and I'm

8 saying have him come off and meet us, and he said

9 he is not on the bus, this is an equipment bus and

10 Bob left on a bus a few minutes before. This is

11 an equipment bus.

12 Q. What did you understand him to mean

13 by equipment bus?

14 A. For the amps and equipment.

15 Q. Okay. What happened next?

16 A. There was some small talk and I can't

17 remember everything or what order everything

18 happened in, but we wanted to -- he says are these

19 for me or something, I'm not sure.

20 Q. Well, okay, let me interrupt you for

21 a minute.

22 MR. KRAMER: You don't want him to

23 finish his answer?

24 MR. SNYDER: His answer is finished,

25 Mr. Kramer.

107

1 Wright

2 Q. Your answer is finished, right?

3 A. I'm not sure if -- what was the

4 question again?

5 Q. The question is, you are saying you


120 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

6 are not sure about exactly what this individual

7 said to you, so I want to back up. Okay. So you

8 can make clear that what you are testifying is

9 what you remember.

10 A. It is vague.

11 Q. All I'm interested in is what you

12 remember today. So was there some discussion

13 about the book or about the lyrics that you had?

14 A. Oh, yes.

15 Q. Who said what first about the lyrics,

16 if you recall?

17 A. I'm not sure. I know we made it

18 clear that we wanted to make sure that Bob gets

19 this book of songs.

20 Q. And what, if anything, did Mr. Reed

21 say in response?

22 A. He said he will make sure, he will

23 send them, if he has to he will set them on his

24 nightstand.

25 Q. On his nightstand?

108

1 Wright

2 A. Dresser, nightstand, you know, in his

3 hotel. He will see him and he sees him all the

4 time and it won't be a problem.

5 Q. Mr. Reed allegedly said that he sees


121 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

6 Dylan all the time and he will set -- if he has to

7 he will set the lyrics --

8 A. He swore to us that he will make sure

9 that Bob gets the songs.

10 Q. You said that he said even if he has

11 to put them on his dresser or nightstand?

12 A. He said something about sending them

13 somewhere, and Jim said, "No, I want you to hand

14 them to him."

15 Q. But you testified about a hotel room

16 dresser or nightstand?

17 A. He mentioned some regard about

18 setting them somewhere and that was not good

19 enough for Jim and he wanted him to hand them to

20 him, and I started to hand the songs to Mike and

21 then I'm not sure if Jimmy grabbed them out of my

22 hand then or if he took them out of Mike's. I

23 think Mike started to read one of the songs and

24 Jimmy just grabbed it out of his hand and started

25 to read the song for him, and he was very

109

1 Wright

2 impressed by the song, at least he seemed that

3 way. And this is the driver now talking about.

4 And he said, "Oh, yes, that is very good," he

5 loves it and he will make sure, he swore to us.

6 Q. You say "he swore to us." Did he use


122 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

7 those words, did he swear to you?

8 A. He promised us.

9 Q. And --

10 A. I was totally convinced that he was

11 going to give the songs to Bob. In fact I was

12 pretty sure he was on the bus, but --

13 Q. And this is the driver of the

14 equipment bus?

15 A. That is what he said.

16 Q. And you said that the driver of the

17 equipment bus told you that he sees Bob Dylan all

18 the time?

19 A. He says he has been driving for him,

20 something to that effect.

21 Q. What did this fellow look like?

22 A. He was a white guy, he -- brown hair,

23 he may have had a mustache, I'm not sure, and he

24 was tall, maybe six foot.

25 Q. Sir, did you ask the driver of the

110

1 Wright

2 equipment bus how it is that he sees Bob Dylan all

3 the time?

4 A. I don't know, we talked and I asked

5 him a couple of times for Bob's autograph because

6 like I kept looking back there and it didn't look


123 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

7 like an equipment bus to me, it looked more like a

8 luxury-type bus. And in fact he was looking back

9 there, there was a curtain drawn, and it looked

10 like a real nice bus, not an equipment bus.

11 Q. You didn't go inside the bus?

12 A. No.

13 Q. So you have no idea what was behind

14 the curtain?

15 A. No, no idea.

16 Q. And when you first knocked on the

17 bus, Mike Reed didn't know who you and Mr. Damiano

18 were, right?

19 A. No, he didn't know us.

20 Q. You said that he was impressed with

21 the lyrics?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Did he actually read some of the

24 lyrics?

25 A. What I remember is he started to read

111

1 Wright

2 them, and maybe it wasn't fast enough for Jim or

3 it wasn't the tone that Jimmy would read it and

4 started -- Jimmy ended up finishing it, reading

5 the rest of it. He just flipped through it and

6 just grabbed the page.

7 Q. Do you remember what he read?


124 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

8 A. No, I don't.

9 Q. And he read, you said lyrics for one

10 song?

11 A. He read -- yes, a song, a poem,

12 whatever, however you might describe it. It was

13 like a short song, it wasn't just like -- it was

14 the whole thing but it was only like a paragraph.

15 I remember looking at it. It was a paragraph this

16 big (indicating), on paper.

17 Q. When you say "this big," about a

18 couple of inches high?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And what, if anything, did the driver

21 of the equipment bus say in response?

22 A. You could just tell he was very

23 impressed by it.

24 Q. And did this driver say anything to

25 you about --

112

1 Wright

2 A. He said, "I like it, I like it a

3 lot." Again, these are not exact quotes, but he

4 said, "I will make sure that Bob gets these

5 songs."


7 A. Basically, we gave him the songs. We


125 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

8 said okay, we shook hands, and then by the time we

9 got in the car, like I was still convinced that

10 Bob was on the bus. But then again that is just

11 me, and I remember saying to Jim, "Oh, they are

12 probably rocking out to My Cousin Joanne right

13 now." That is how I remember that there was a

14 tape in that thing because I remember saying that

15 to him.

16 Q. And you have no idea --

17 A. And probably driving down the highway

18 rocking to My Cousin Joanne right now probably.

Copies of the tickets to the waterloo concert are displayed below:

Brad Wright also testified under oath that on September 6, 1988, he accompanied James Damiano to yet another

concert backstage at Radio City Music Hall. Plaintiff was given Back stage passes at this concert. Brad also

testified that someone back stage took James Damiano's songs.


126 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Although Brad's testimony along with depositional testimony of other witnesses in this case was much more in

depth and revealing of defendants solicitation of plaintiff James Damiano's songs it was disregarded Judge

Simandle. Why?

Motive:

Dylan had writers block for commercially viable songs during at least a portion of the relevant period of time,

from the early eighties to 1994 when defendants solicited James Damiano's songs.

Bob Dylan gave an interview to Associated Press reporter Kathryn Baker. .The interview took place while having

dinner at a restaurant in California. With Dylan's permission Ms. Baker recorded the interview.

When Ms. Baker's article appeared in the newspaper, it quoted Bob Dylan as saying:

"There is no rule that claims anyone must write their own songs and I do I write a lot of songs. but so what you

know? You could take another song somebody else has written and you could make it your own."

The article goes on to talk about the fact that this was the first time Dylan had ever used other writers on an

album. The article states that it was inevitable that Dylan did not have enough material of his own for an album.

Ms. Baker then quotes Dylan again as saying :


127 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

"Writing is like such an isolated thing. You're in such an isolated frame of mind. You have got to get into that

place. In the old days I could get to it real quick. I can't get to it like that no more. It's not that simple.

Ms. Baker goes on to quote Bob Dylan: "I mean just being able to shut yourself off for long periods of time,

where you're so isolated, no one can get to you mentally or physically, you know. You need to do that to come

up with that kind of stuff."

Ms. Baker quotes Dylan once again: "You're always capable in your youth and especially if you're an unknown

and nobody cares, like if you're an anonymous person, but once that all ends, then you have to create not only

what you want to but you have to create the environment to do it in which is double hard." A true and correct

copy of this letter will be produced upon request.


Kathryn Baker testified under oath:

Plaintiffï¿½s attorney Steven M. Kramer deposed Kathryn Baker:

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

3

4 JAMES DAMIANO,

5 PLAINTIFF, ) CASE NO.

6 VS. ) 95CV4795(JBS)

7 SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT, INC., )

8 AND BOB DYLAN, )

9 DEFENDANTS. )

13 VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF:

14 KATHRYN BAKER

15 MONDAY, APRIL 1, 1996

16 10:17 A.M.

23 FILE NO. LL62034

24 REPORTED BY DAWSHA LAYLAND BAKER

25 C.S.R. NO. 5166

1

1 VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF KATHRYN BAKER, THE


128 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

2 WITNESS, TAKEN ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF, AT

3 10:17 A.M., MONDAY, APRIL 1, 1996, AT 9606 SANTA

4 MONICA BOULEVARD, BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA, BEFORE

5 DAWSHA LAYLAND BAKER, C.S.R. NO. 5166, PURSUANT TO

6 SUBPOENA.

7 8 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

9 FOR PLAINTIFF:

10 LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN M. KRAMER &

11 ASSOCIATES

12 BY: STEVEN M. KRAMER, ESQ.

13 150 WEST 56TH STREET

14 65TH FLOOR

15 NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10019

16

17 FOR DEFENDANTS:

18 PARCHER & HAYES

19 BY: STEVEN M. HAYES, ESQ.

20 500 FIFTH AVENUE

21 38TH FLOOR

22 NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10110

23

24 ALSO PRESENT: GEOFF MINGER, VIDEOGRAPHER

25 CHRISTIAN MARTINEZ

2

KERNS & GRADILLAS CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTERS

(310) 556-1136


129 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1 I N D E X

2 WITNESS EXAMINATION PAGE

3 KATHRYN BAKER BY MR. KRAMER 5, 37

4 BY MR. HAYES 19, 46

5 6 OBJECTIONS BY COUNSEL

7 PAGE LINE PAGE LINE PAGE LINE

8 25 17 29 21 37 17

9 42 6 43 14 43 21

13 E X H I B I T S

14 NO. PAGE DESCRIPTION

15 1 8 NEWSPAPER ARTICLE ENTITLED

16 "DYLAN SURVIVES CHANGIN' TIMES"

18 "DYLAN: A REBEL MELLOWS"

2 MONDAY, APRIL 1, 1996, 10:17 A.M.

3

4 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the

5 videotaped deposition of Kathryn Baker, in the

6 matter of Damiano versus Sony Music Entertainment,

7 Incorporated, and Bob Dylan. Today's date is

8 April 1st, 1996. The time is 10:17 a.m. This

9 recording is taking place at 9606 Santa Monica

10 Boulevard, in Beverly Hills, California.

11 My name is Geoff Minger, a notary

12 public in the state of California. I represent

13 Kerns & Gradillas Video Services, located at

14 9320 Wilshire Boulevard in Beverly Hills,

15 California.


130 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

16 This deposition is being videotaped on

17 behalf of the plaintiff. I am neither counsel for,

18 employed by or related to any party in this action,

19 nor am I interested in the outcome thereof.

20 Counsel, please introduce yourselves

21 and state your appearance.

22 MR. KRAMER: Steven Kramer, on behalf

23 of the plaintiff.

24 MR. HAYES: Steven Hayes, the firm of

25 Parcher & Hayes, for the defendants.

4

KERNS & GRADILLAS CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTERS

(310) 556-1136 1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are on the

2 record. Would the court reporter please swear in

3 the witness.

4

5 KATHRYN BAKER,

6 having been first duly sworn, was

7 examined and testified as follows:

8

9 EXAMINATION

10 BY MR. KRAMER:

11 Q. Miss Baker, good morning.

12 A. Good morning.

13 Q. This deposition is being taken

14 pursuant to notice and subpoena. Did you receive a


131 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

15 subpoena to appear here?

16 A. Yes, I did.

17 Q. And what is your profession, ma'am?

18 A. I'm a writer.

19 Q. And by whom are you employed

20 currently?

21 A. Currently Spelling Entertainment.

22 Q. In what capacity?

23 A. I'm executive story editor on the show

24 "Melrose Place."

25 Q. Was there a time that you were

5

1 employed or in some way affiliated with the

2 Associated Press?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And when was that, ma'am?

5 A. From 1981 until 1989.

6 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is

7 10:19 a.m. We're off the record.

8 (Discussion held off the record.)

9 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is

10 10:19 a.m. We're back on the record.

11 BY MR. KRAMER:

12 Q. Miss Baker, during the time 1981 to

a.m. We're back on the record.

11 BY MR. KRAMER:

12 Q. Miss Baker, during the time 1981 to


132 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

13 1989 that you were affiliated with the Associated

14 Press, what was your position or profession?

15 A. Variously I was the staff

16 writer/editor the last three years. I believe from

17 1986 to 1989 I was the television critic, but I also

18 wrote other entertainment features.

19 Q. What is the Associated Press?

20 A. It's a cooperative of thousands of

21 newspapers. It's a wire service.

22 Q. Okay. And is it fair to say that it's

23 stationed or represented all over the country?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Okay. And where were you represented?

6

1 A. At the time in question, the last

2 three years I was with them, I was in New York.

3 Q. Okay. And in your capacity as a

4 writer for the Associated Press, did you, from time

5 to time, conduct interviews of various personalities

6 and stars and celebrities and such?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Okay. Could you give us an idea of

9 just a few examples?

10 A. Well, as television critic, I

11 interviewed people like David Letterman and various

12 television stars. Probably Dylan, who I interviewed


133 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

13 in 1988 -- was probably -- if anybody asked me who

14 was the biggest star I interviewed, it was probably

15 him.

16 Q. And as you know, you're here today

17 concerning an interview that you conducted with

18 Mr. Dylan. You understand that?

19 A. Right.

20 Q. When was that interview conducted,

21 ma'am?

22 A. August 5th, 1988.

23 Q. Okay. And in preparation for today's

24 appearance here, did you review any notes?

25 A. Yes, I reviewed the transcript of the

7

1 tape.

2 Q. Okay. And does a tape recording

3 exist?

4 A. Yes.

5 MR. KRAMER: And let me show you a

6 copy -- or a portion of a copy of the article. This

7 is the only copy that we have, and I'll ask the

8 court reporter to first mark it as Exhibit 1 to this

9 deposition and please attach it to the transcript.

10 (The document referred to was

11 marked by the C.S.R. as Plaintiff's

12 Exhibit 1 for identification and

13 attached to and made a part of this


134 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

14 deposition.)

15 BY MR. KRAMER:

16 Q. Would you be kind enough to look at

17 that document and if you can identify it, please do

18 so, Miss Baker.

19 A. Yeah. This is the story that I wrote

20 that ran on the wire based on that interview.

21 Q. What is the title of this article,

22 ma'am?

23 A. This particular newspaper, it says

24 "Dylan Survives Changin' Times." The newspapers

25 put their own headline on the story. I'm not sure

8

1 what the headline we put on it was.

2 Q. It says "By Kathryn Baker, Associated

3 Press Writer, Beverly Hills, California."

4 Are you that Kathryn Baker?

5 A. Yes.

6 MR. HAYES: The copy I have just has

7 two pages and seems to refer to there being another

8 page.

9 MR. KRAMER: Yes. Those are the only

10 two pages that we have. I was going to ask

11 Ms. Baker.

12 Q. Do you have a complete copy of this at

13 some location?


135 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Okay. And would you be willing, at

16 your convenience, to provide both myself and

17 Mr. Hayes with a copy of that --

18 A. Okay. Sure.

19 Q. -- so that we could have a complete

20 copy?

21 A. Yes.

22 MR. HAYES: I have a copy here today

23 which I'll be happy to have you mark, instead. The

24 only problem I have, the first part of it is a

25 little less clear.

9

1 MR. KRAMER: Why don't we mark this as

2 Exhibit 2.

3 MR. HAYES: That's fine. That will

4 provide the third page.

5 MR. KRAMER: Great.

6 (The document referred to was

7 marked by the C.S.R. as Plaintiff's

8 Exhibit 2 for identification and

9 attached to and made a part of this

10 deposition.)

11 BY MR. KRAMER:

12 Q. Would you be kind enough to look at

13 what is now Exhibit 2, Miss Baker, and tell me if

14 that appears to be the complete article, complete


136 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

15 interview that appeared.

16 A. Yes, it does.

17 Q. Did you tape-record this interview?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And in preparation today, did you

20 compare what appears in the article with the actual

21 tape or the transcript of the tape?

22 A. With the transcript of the tape.

23 Q. Okay.

24 A. Which I previously had compared with

25 the tape, so the transcript is accurate.

10

1 Q. Okay. And where did this interview

2 take place between yourself and Mr. Dylan?

3 A. It was over dinner at a restaurant

4 called Il Cielo here in Beverly Hills.

5 Q. Do you recall when it took place?

6 A. August 5th, 1988 in the evening,

7 sometime around 7:00 or 8:00 o'clock, something like

8 that.

9 Q. Was anyone else present at the table

10 with you?

11 A. Yes, Elliot Mintz, who was at the time

12 Bob Dylan's publicist.

13 Q. Does his voice, from time to time,

14 appear on the tape?


137 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

15 A. A couple of times.

16 Q. Would you describe for the jury your

17 process, then, if you had one, of how you would go

18 about conducting an interview in connection with

19 having the tape recording?

20 In other words, what is the purpose of

21 having a tape recorder there during the interview?

22 A. Well, I particularly like to rely on a

23 tape recorder rather than taking notes because it's

24 easier to conduct a more casual conversation with

25 someone.

11

1 In this particular instance, I had the

2 tape recorder on the table and even had a little

3 mike, so he was very aware that he was being

4 tape-recorded. That way you don't have to take any

5 notes.

6 We were having dinner, so it made it a

7 little easier, and then the hard part is having to

8 transcribe the entire tape which also included

9 dinner.

10 Q. And who actually physically

11 transcribed that tape?

12 A. Elliot Mintz provided a transcriber

13 because it is a lot of work to do it and I needed to

14 get the story out -- AP wanted me to get the story

15 out relatively soon because it was an exclusive


138 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

16 interview. So I let him do that.

17 I took the transcript and went through

18 it with the tape. I didn't have to do the actual

19 typing -- in fact, when I went through the

20 transcript, I noticed where I had made too little

21 corrections to make sure that the quotes in the

22 transcript exactly matched what was on the tape.

23 Q. Okay. And are you comfortable today

24 that the transcript, with your corrections, is an

25 accurate transcription of the tape?

12

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Okay. Would you be kind enough to

3 look at Exhibit 1. And I've turned it over to at

4 least what appears to be the second page of the

5 interview.

6 A. Mm-hmm.

7 Q. And the right-hand half of the page.

8 A. Mm-hmm.

9 Q. I'm going to read a couple of

10 sentences. And after I read each one, my question

11 will be the same, and that is: Did Mr. Dylan say

12 that?

13 A. Okay.

14 Q. Do you understand?

15 A. Yes.


139 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

16 Q. Okay. If you would look, ma'am,

17 towards the next to the last column of that page,

18 what appears to be the third or fourth paragraph

19 from the bottom, it says -- let's start at the top

20 so we can put it in context.

21 A. Okay.

22 Q. I think it probably makes more sense.

23 Actually, let's go to the bottom

24 left-hand side of the page, "The album."

25 Do you see where I have --

13

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. "The album" --

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Let's pick it up there. "The album"

5 reads -- I'm reading from the interview that appears

6 in the Associated Press August 1988, Exhibit 1,

7 quote -- and these are your words, I take it, until

8 we actually see quotes.

9 "The album surprised some

10 critics because it is mostly covers of

11 other composers' songs."

12 Could you explain to the jury what the

13 word "covers" means in that context?

14 A. That's when an artist records a song

15 that was written by another songwriter.

16 Q. So in this context, this refers to


140 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

17 songs recorded by Mr. Dylan on his album, but that

18 had been written by other composers?

19 A. Actually, I -- this -- I --

20 technically "covers" means redoing a song that's

21 been recorded by someone else.

22 Q. Okay.

23 A. So I'm not sure that's entirely

24 accurate. I'm sure all these songs were recorded

25 sometime before.

14

1 Q. Okay. But, in essence, these -- you

2 were referring to songs recorded by him, but that

3 had been composed by other people?

4 A. Right.

5 Q. You then continue, quote:

6 "There are only two Dylan

7 originals, plus two collaborations

8 with Grateful Dead songwriter Robert

9 Hunter, including the single," quote,

10 "'Silvio,'" unquote.

11 Would it be fair to state Grateful

12 Dead is a very famous rock and roll band?

13 A. Right.

14 Q. Okay. Then you continue:

15 "Dylan said he picked the

16 other material because he liked it.


141 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

17 Quote, "'Down in the Groove,'"

18 unquote, "establishes Dylan as a

19 recording artist and arranger with the

20 strength of style to transcend the

21 source of the material."

22 You wrote those words?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And then you write what appears to be

25 a quote from Mr. Dylan, and then I'll ask you if it

15

1 is, in fact, such. Quote:

2 "'There's no rule that claims

3 that anyone must write their own

4 songs,'" unquote, "he says."

5 Miss Baker, did Mr. Dylan say those

6 words?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And when you use the words "he says,"

9 is that Mr. Dylan says?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. You continue with, quote:

12 "'And I do. I write a lot of

13 songs. But so what, you know? You

14 could take another song somebody else

15 has written and you can make it

16 yours. I'm not saying I made a

17 definitive version of anything with


142 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

18 this last record, but I liked the

19 songs. Every so often you've got to

20 sing songs that're out there. You

21 just have to, just to keep yourself

22 straight.'"

23 Did Mr. Dylan say those words?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. You then continue without quotes:

16

1 "The other reason for the

2 others is inevitable: He didn't" --

3 d-i-d-n-'t, as in did not -- "He

4 didn't have enough material of his own

5 for an album."


7 A. I went back in the transcript and I

8 was paraphrasing him and that's not entirely

9 accurate. He said he didn't have enough songs that

10 he wanted to put on an album.

11 Q. You then continue, quote:

12 "'Writing is like such an

13 isolated thing. You're in such an

14 isolated frame of mind.'"

15 Did Mr. Dylan say that?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. You continue, quote:


143 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

18 "'You have to get into or be

19 in that place.'"


21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Quote:

23 "'In the old days, I could

24 get to it real quick.'"


17

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Quote:

3 "'I can't'" -- c-a-n-'t, as

4 in cannot -- "'I can't get to it like

5 that no more. It's not that simple.'"


7 A. Yes.

8 Q. You continue, ma'am, quote:

9 "'I mean, just being able to

10 shut yourself off for long periods of

11 time, where you're so isolated, no one

12 can get to you, mentally or

13 physically, you know.'"


15 A. Yes.


17 "'You need to be able to do

18 that in order to come up with that


144 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

19 kind of stuff.'"


21 A. Yes.

22 Q. You continue, ma'am, quote:

23 "'You're always capable of it

24 in your youth, and especially if

25 you're an unknown and nobody cares --

18

1 like if you're an anonymous person.'"

2 Did he say those words?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. "He" being Mr. Dylan?

5 A. Right.


7 "'But once that all ends,

8 then you have to create not only what

9 you want to do, but you have to create

10 the environment to do it in, which is

11 double hard.'"


13 A. Yes.

14 MR. KRAMER: Thank you. No further

15 questions.

The Associated Press filed a motion to block the production of the actual interview tape with Bob Dylanï¿½s

voice.

1988 - Was the beginning of a trend in Dylan's career that documents his use of other songwriterï¿½s materials on

his albums for profit.


145 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1988 - Bob Dylan released the "Down In the Groove album. Three of the songs on this album were newly written

original songs by Bob Dylan, and one other one other was co-written with Robert Hunter of the Grateful Dead.

The other six or seven songs on "Down In The Groove" were songs taken from songs in the public Domain or

traditional folk songs in which Dylan did not write.

There is a good chance that Dylan did not pay any royalties to the owners of these songs that he recorded,

released to the public and profited from.

This also documents the fact that Dylan was not as prolific as he was in his earlier days and that he was in need of

material.

In 1989 Bob Dylan released the "Oh Mercy " album. On this album there were similarities between Bob Dylan's

material and Plaintiff James Damiano material.

On June 4th, 1990 James Damiano contacted a lawyer Thomas Ruff. Mr. Ruff wrote the following letter to Tony

Tiller of CBS Records. A true and correct copy of this letter will be produced upon request.

Dear Mr. Tiller:

I write as a representative of James Damiano, who is now living in the Charlotte area. As you may recall, Mr.

Damiano has written numerous songs and has submitted many of them to you. He has also submitted material to

Bob Dylan on three occasions and receipt of those materials has been acknowledged.

James presently feels that there is no point in waiting for further progress on the question of producing his work.

He would like to contact other companies and artists in this regard. He feels that it would be best if he recovered

the previously submitted materials.

I would appreciate your reviewing this situation at your earliest convenience If there is any reason for you to

retain the works let me know. If you know any reason for Dylan's retention of works submitted to him, I would

also appreciate hearing from you. Otherwise I will look forward to receiving the previously submitted materials at

your earliest convenience.

Sincerely, Thomas C. Ruff. Jr.


146 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Mr. Ruff told me he was surprised that Mr. Tiller disregarded his letter.

Tony Tiller neither sent the material back or contacted Tom Ruff.

When I talked to Tony Tiller on the phone he told me that the songs were safe with him and that I would be

better off if I left them with him in his office.

He told me that if someone stopped at his office, they would be able to hear the songs or read the lyric sheets.

October 31, 1990.

On October 31, 1990 - Bob Dylan was playing a concert at Ovens Auditorium in Charlotte North Carolina. Tony

told me that there were complimentary tickets for me at the ticket window and asked me to bring some more of

my songs to Bob Dylan.

I called a few friends and asked them if they would like to go to the concert with me. One of the friends was Tom

Ruff. I picked up the tickets and went to the area where the busses were parked. I had an envelope in my hand. In

the envelope were lyric sheets of my songs. In my pocket I had two white cassette tapes of my music.

Four people approached me and asked me if I would like for them to give Bob Dylan the package of songs. One

of those people told me his name was Richard Fernandez and that he was Bob Dylan's tour manager. Tom Ruff

had advised me not to give the songs to anyone not even Bob Dylan.

Tom Ruff also advised me, that I should tell anyone from Dylan's organization who wanted me to give the songs

to them, that I was legally advised to say that I will not give them the songs but, that if Bob Dylan wanted to


147 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

seethe songs that I was willing to go back to the hotel room and let Dylan see them. That is what I told these four

people that approached me.

I was then approached by another person who asked me if I wanted to meet Dylan's bus driver. I knew that they

were controlling the situation so I went along with him. We walked over to a bus that was an older bus and

parked off in the distance.

As we approached the bus there was a man looking out the front window. The man I walked over to the bus with

motioned to the man looking out the window for him to come down off the bus.

He came off the bus, walked over to us and was introduced to me as Tom Masters. We talked for about fifteen

minutes and I explained that Tony Tiller told me to bring these songs here tonight.

Mr. Masters told me he was unable to take the songs. I then told Mr. Masters that I was legally advised to not give

the songs to anyone but that if Dylan wanted to see the songs that I was willing to go somewhere to let Dylan see

them.

Mr. Masters said Bob could not do that. We talked a little while longer and Tom told me that he had to leave. We

shook hands, he turned around, took a couple of steps, stopped and turned around toward me and said "But if

you want me to give the songs to Bob I will." I responded to Tom 's remark and said "I told you that I can't give

you the songs but here are two tapes of my music." as I handed him two tapes.

Tom Masters took the tapes and got on the bus.

Sometime after I received the following letter from Tom Masters


148 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Copies to the tickets at Ovens Auditorium are displayed below:

The tapes included plaintiff's song "Steel Guitars" also identified as "Dignity" on plaintiff's 1982 copyright

registration. Other versions of "Steel Guitars" however had been previously submitted to John Hammond and

Mikie Harris in 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986 and 1987.

"Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration) was also submitted

to Tony Tiller and Dylan associateï¿½s in 1987 and 1988.

Bob Dylan recorded "Dignity" in 1989 but he did not register his copyright of ï¿½Dignityï¿½ until

December,1991

One of the people who approached me that night, before I was introduced to Tom Masters was Richard

Fernandez. Richard gave me an address in Beverly Hills to send material to. I sent materials certified mail to that

address with return receipt requested. Richard Fernandez was also deposed:

His testimony verified that Tom Masters was on tour with Bob Dylan and Richard Fernandez in 1990 and 1991 in

which Bob Dylan played Ovens auditorium on that tour.

Mr. Fernandez's testimony also verified that Mike Reed was part of Bob Dylan's entourage.


1

1

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

3 ---------------------------------------x

JAMES DAMIANO,

4 Plaintiff,

5 Case No.


149 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

-against- 95-4795

6 SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT, INC.

7 and BOB DYLAN,

8 Defendants.

---------------------------------------x

9

10 June 24, 1996

11:34 a.m.

11

12 Videotaped deposition of RICHARD FERNANDEZ, taken

13 by Plaintiff, pursuant to notice, at the offices

14 of Parcher & Hayes, P.C., 500 Fifth Avenue, New

15 York, New York, before Nadia El Rez, a Shorthand

16 Reporter and Notary Public within and for the

17 State of New York.

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

2

1

2

3 A p p e a r a n c e s:

4


150 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

STEVEN M. KRAMER & ASSOCIATES

5 Attorneys for Plaintiff

150 West 56th Street

6 65th Floor

New York, New York 10019

7

BY: STEVEN M. KRAMER, ESQ.,

8

of Counsel

9

10 PARCHER & HAYES, P.C.

Attorneys for Defendants

11 500 Fifth Avenue

New York, New York 10110

12

BY: ORIN SNYDER, ESQ.,

13

of Counsel

14

15 Also Present:

16 MARK BRADY, Videographer

Doyle Reporting, Inc.

17

18 ***

19

20

21


151 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

22

23

24

25

3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED

8 by and between the attorneys for the

9 respective parties hereto that the sealing

10 and filing of the within deposition be, and

11 the same hereby are, waived; and that the

12 transcript may be signed before any Notary

13 Public with the same force and effect as if

14 signed before the Court.

15 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED

16 that all objections, except as to the form

17 of the question, shall be reserved to the

18 time of trial.

19

20

21


152 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

22 ***

23

24

25

4

1

2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are on the

3 record.

4 My name is Mark Brady. I represent

5 Doyle Reporting, located at 369 Lexington

6 Avenue, New York, New York. I will be the

7 videographer for today.

8 Today's date is 6/24/96, and this is

9 the case of James Damiano versus Sony Music

10 Entertainment, Incorporated and Bob Dylan,

11 case numbers 95-4795.

12 We are here at the office of Parcher

13 & Hayes, located at 500 Fifth Avenue, New

14 York, New York, and this is the deposition

15 of Richard Fernandez.

16 At this time counsel will identify

17 themselves.

18 MR. KRAMER: Steven Kramer for

19 plaintiff.

20 MR. SNYDER: Orin Snyder for the

21 defendants.

22 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: At this time I


153 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

23 will have the court reporter swear in the

24 witness.

25 R I C H A R D F E R N A N D E Z,

5

1

2 having been first duly sworn by the Notary

3 Public (Nadia El Rez), was examined and

4 testified as follows:

5 EXAMINATION

6 BY MR. KRAMER:

7 Q. Mr. Fernandez, please state your home

8 address and home telephone number.

9 A. 1751 Mauna Ikena Road, Kapaa, Hawaii,

10 9675 -- 96746. 808-822-7879.

11 Q. Thank you.

12 And by whom are you employed, sir?

13 A. Right now?

14 Q. Yes.

15 A. Dannet, Inc.

16 Q. And what is Dannet, Inc.?

17 A. A touring company.

18 Q. And who owns Dannet, Inc.?

19 A. Donald Fagen and Walter Becker.

20 Q. And what is your position there, sir?

21 A. I'm a tour manager.

22 Q. And in that capacity, have you ever


154 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

23 performed services as a tour manager for Bob

24 Dylan?

25 A. Yes, East West Touring, I believe.

6

1 Fernandez

2 Q. And what is East West Touring, sir?

3 A. That's Bob Dylan's touring company.

4 Q. And where are they located?

5 A. Let's see, they have got an office in

6 New York and an office in Los Angeles. Well, a

7 management office in Los Angeles and an office in

8 New York.

9 Q. Have you ever been to the office in

10 New York?

11 A. No.

12 Q. And where is the office in Los

13 Angeles?

14 A. I believe now it is in Beverly Hills

15 on, I believe, Beverly Boulevard.

16 I haven't talked to Jeff about it in

17 six or eight months.

18 Q. Okay. Jeff Kramer's office --

19 A. Uh-huh.

20 Q. Were you a tour manager for Mr. Dylan

21 in any of the past five years?

22 A. Any of the past -- yes.

23 Q. Okay. Taking it from the most


155 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

24 recent, that is from today, backwards, would you

25 tell me what tours, or what years?

7

1 Fernandez

2 A. Last tour I did with Bob was 1991.

3 Q. That was the last time?

4 A. Yeah.

5 Q. Okay. And that tour, did that

6 include Charlotte, North Carolina?

7 A. In '91?

8 Q. Or '90, October of '90?

9 A. I'd have to look back in my records.

10 I don't recall. Probably, but I couldn't be

11 certain.

12 Q. Okay. Have you ever been in an

13 auditorium in Charlotte which I believe is called

14 Ovens Auditorium?

15 A. Not to my knowledge. I don't

16 remember that. Is it on a campus or anything do

17 you know or is it --

18 Q. I don't know.

19 A. Ovens Auditorium, I don't remember

20 Ovens Auditorium.

21 Q. Have you ever been in Charlotte?

22 A. Oh, yes.

23 Q. Have you ever been in Charlotte with


156 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

24 Bob Dylan?

25 A. I believe so, yeah.

8

1 Fernandez

2 Q. Okay. When was the last time? 3 A. I don't recall. I mean it was --

4 Q. What decade?

5 A. Probably in the 90's.

6 Q. Okay. And the last time you worked

7 with him was in '91, right?

8 A. That's correct.

9 Q. So it would either be '90 or '91?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Okay. Take a moment to think, tell

12 me the best of your recollection, if you can, what

13 year was it, '91 or '90?

14 A. I would say '90. I don't really know

15 for certain, but I think '90. It would have been

16 in the summer, I think.

17 Q. Okay. And that would have been in

18 North Carolina?

19 A. Yeah.

20 Q. Okay. Do you remember how big the

21 hall was?

22 A. No.

23 There were many tours a year for many

24 artists, it's hard to --

25 Q. I understand.


157 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

9

1 Fernandez

2 A. Yeah.

3 Q. And do you have any recollection at

4 any Bob Dylan concert being handed any papers with

5 songs on them, by anyone? I would ask you to

6 focus on North Carolina in that tour that you just

7 identified, 1990. Do you recall anyone handing

8 you any documents?

9 A. No. No.

10 Q. Has anyone ever handed you any

11 documents --

12 A. Yes. People have handed me

13 documents.

14 Q. Let me finish the question.

15 Has anyone ever handed you any

16 documents with songs on them, while you were

17 working with Mr. Dylan?

18 A. Not that I remember, no.

19 Q. Never?

20 A. Like pieces of paper?

21 Q. Or a folder or a book, with songs in

22 them?

23 A. Not to my knowledge. I don't

24 remember that.

25 Q. Do you have any recollection of the


158 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

10

1 Fernandez

2 North Carolina concert?

3 A. No. I mean I have to go back through

4 my books and look at to see what '90 -- and then

5 I'd look at my log.

6 Q. Tell me what book you would look at?

7 A. It's a book that just says what I do

8 every day, where the gigs are, what phone calls I

9 have to make. Just a log of what I do.

10 Q. Okay. And you keep them by year?

11 A. Yeah.

12 Q. Do you still have your 1990 book?

13 A. Yeah.

14 Q. At home --

15 A. Yeah.

17 What I'd like to do now is list some

18 names of people to you and I'd like to ask you if

19 you've ever heard of these people.

20 A. Uh-huh.

21 Q. Rob Stoner?

22 A. I've heard of him, yes.

23 Q. Have you ever spoken with him?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Have you ever seen him?

11

1 Fernandez


159 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

2 A. No. Isn't he a -- isn't he from --

3 the Rob Stoner I'm thinking about is a song writer

4 or singer from Austin, Texas. That's the Rob

5 Stoner I'm talking about.

6 Q. And just tell me, so we can determine

7 if it's the same person --

8 A. I think I may have heard a song of

9 his somebody said you got to listen to this. I

10 think it was Rob Stoner. The name sounds

11 familiar.

12 Q. Okay. But you never laid eyes on

13 him, to your knowledge?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Bobby Neuwirth?

16 A. No. Sounds like one of the guys from

17 the Monkees, but I don't know.

18 Q. Mike Reed?

19 A. Mike Reed, yes. Mike Reed was a

20 truck driver. He has done a couple of different

21 tours.

22 Q. Any with you?

23 A. Pardon?

24 Q. Any with you?

25 A. Yes.

12

1 Fernandez


160 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

2 Q. Which tours with you?

3 A. I think he worked a Tom Petty tour

4 with me. I think he may have worked a Yes tour

5 with me, and I think he was on a Bob tour with me.

6 Q. When you say a Bob tour, a Bob Dylan

7 tour?

8 A. Bob Dylan tour.

Bob Dylan recorded "Dignity" in 1989.

Although Dylan recorded "Dignity" in 1989 he did not release it until December of 1994, almost five years later.

Articles appeared on the internet stating that although Dylan finally had a hit song again he did not play it at any

of his concerts while on tour.

Note: Normal music business operations in the music industry is that when a band has a hit song, it tours on that

song, meaning that the reason for the tour is to promote the album or in this case being that "Dignity" was the

only newly written original song Dylan had released in almost four years, the song.

Note: If Dylan had toured with the intention of promoting his new material the "Dylan unplugged" video and CD

and his "Bob Dylan Greatest Hits Volume 3" CD ( which "Dignity" was the only newly written original song on

the CD and video ) , it is undisputable that "Dignity" bridged Bob Dylan's career from 1990 to 1997, when his

fans were aware that he had not released a new song in three years and eleven months.

Please note that after Dylan released "Dignity" in November of 1994 he had not released another newly written

original song for another four years until 1998 on the "Time Out Of Mind CD"

One must also wonder if it is true why Dylan had not played "Dignity" on his tour after it was released.

Sometime after the Ovens Auditorium concert Tom Masters called me at my home. I was not there but my Mother

in law who was visiting at the time answered the phone and told him that I was not there.

A couple weeks later Tom Masters called again. He told me that he had some friends over and that they just

listened to my tape. He told me one of my tapes was still on Bob Dylan's tour bus. I asked him if Bob heard the

tape and he replied "Yeah Bob heard it and he thought it was good." I said "really?" and Tom said "Yeah Bob

liked it."

I asked Tom "Is Bob There now?" Tom replied "No." When out of the clear blue sky Tom asked me where the

songs were that I said I was going to send him. I didn't know what he was talking about because I thought that we

had already established the fact that I was not going to send any more of my songs as per Tom Ruff's advise.

I told Tom "I told you I wasn't going to send anymore material." Tom then said "Oh I thought you told me you

were going to send me songs" I replied "Tom, how can I send you songs when I don't have your address?" Tom

replied "Oh, well if you want to send them my address is"[ and he gave me his address.]

I had no receipts for all the material that I submitted to Bob Dylan so I decided to send the songs to Tom Master's

certified mail with return receipt requested.


161 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

On January 18, 1991, someone at Tom Mastersï¿½s address signed for James Damiano's songs.

[Enter Tom Mastersï¿½s certified mail receipt dated January 18, 1991.]

On January 20, 1991, I (James Damiano) received a letter from Tom Masters transcribed below:

Dear Jimmy:

I received the certified letter with your lyrics, which I am returning to you. I am flattered of course that you

picked me to send them to, but let me reiterate the following:

I am Bob's bus driver no more. He does not discuss his music with me. I take care of the bus and he takes care of

the music. People hand me tapes all day long. hoping that Bob will listen to them. I tell them exactly what I am

telling you. Please do not send me anymore lyrics or tapes. They will be returned unopened or thrown in the

trash.

I wish you the best in your musical endeavors, however I am not the contact you think I am and I am requesting

that you neither call nor send me anymore of your work.

The best of luck to you,

Sincerely

Tom Masters.

1990 Bob Dylan releases "Under the Red Sky" album. Similarities exist between James Damiano's material and

Bob Dylan's material.

On 1/30/91 January 30, 1991 Bob Dylan's publisher Jeff Rosen's office signed certified mail for James Damiano's

songs.

On June 19, 1991 Elliot Mintz of Dylan's organization signed certified mail receipt for James Damiano's songs.

[Enter all certified mail receipts Bob Dylan, Elliot Mintz and Jeff Rosen]

[Enter Tom Masters recorded phone conversations]

{Enter Tony Tiller recorded phone conversations 1 through 12}

{Enter Elliot Mintz Mikie Harris / recorded phone conversations }

{ Enter Elliot Mintz / deposition }

1992 No newly written original songs by Bob Dylan. Album released "As Good As I've Been To You."

The following recorded phone conversation between Tony Tiller and James Damiano recorded on December 5th,

1992 was produced to Judge Simandle by Plaintiff's attorney.

Tony - Hello

James - Anthony?


162 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Tony - Hi.

James - Hello.

Tony - Hi, how are you.

James - Boy you're a hard guy to get a hold of.

Tony - You didn't call me back yesterday.

Tony - What time did you call? James - About five minutes after. You were on the line to Germany or something.

Tony - Gee well it's unfortunate that you choose right now to call.

James - Oh really. I just need to ask you a fast question. I'm going to Nashville. I wrote a book. Remember when

you said that when you got a promotion, that if it was in A&R, that I would have been the first person you would

sign? Would you write me a letter to that effect before I go. I'm going in two weeks, to meet some people in

Nashville about my songs. Could you write me a letter just so when I get down there I could show them that they

Or at least you were serious about the music.

Tony - Yeah"

James - Thank you I really appreciate that.

Tony - But I really have to go now.

James - I'm sorry.

Tony - The other call is costing a mint while they're on hold and I'm hoping they will still be there when I get

back.

James- Let me ask you one more question. Did Mitch call you?

Note : Mitch Berman works for Bob Dylan and in all the recorded conversations emphatically denies knowing

Tony Tiller of CBS Records. Mitch Berman is also know as Elliot Mintz.

James - Let me ask you one more question. Did Mitch call you?

Tony - Um recently?

James - Yeah.

Tony - No.

James - I wrote a book. Is it all right to put in the book that you told me to go back stage at Jones beach to give

Bob Dylan the material?

Tony - Uh No.

James - Don't put that in the book?

Tony - No.


163 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

James - I'm sorry?

Tony - No do not.

James - Why can't I put that in the book?

Tony - No, because that would make me as an employee of the company liable for telling you to do that, and that

would be uncool.

James - Okay.

Tony - But I have to go now.

James - Okay Ant.

Tony - I will talk to you soon.

James - Okay thanks.

All information contained within this document was produced to defendants during discovery in case CV

9547-54 (JBS), ((James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan and Sony Music Entertainment), no less than three and a half

years ago. Plaintiff wishes to note that the defendants have not denied any of the issues of fact stated herein with

specificity concerning all chronological events concerning correspondence between parties and witness.

1993 - No newly written original songs by Bob Dylan. Album released by Dylan, was "World Gone Wrong"

Honest about

The lies he tell

Lies about

The religion

He sells

Damiano 88 Copyright

Plaintiff James Damiano's musical expert in this litigation Doctor Green who Graduated Magna Cum Laude from

Harvard University reports:

Dear Mr. Damiano: Following your requests, I have briefly reviewed the instrumental introduction to "Love is a

Miracle" on your audio cassette copyright 1982. This short introduction seems to bear melodic, harmonic, and

rhythmic similarities to "Steel Guitars"(also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright

registration) , as copyrighted in 1982 and 1988.

There is a good chance that a careful examination of this material may show that in 1982 you were experimenting

with many of the musical ideas that came together later in "Steel Guitars"(also identified as "Dignity" on James

Damiano's 1982 copyright registration) . Moreover, other elements of "Steel Guitars" can be heard in other songs,

not only on the 1982 cassette, but on the cassette copyrighted in 1988.

I propose that a careful analysis of several or all of your works leading up to "Steel Guitars" may allow me to

piece together a historical account of your creation of this composition. Sincerely Paul Green


164 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

To review Doctor Greene's letter click on text

Quotes from Doctor Green's comparative analysis of Dylan's song "Dignity" and James Damiano's song "Steel

Guitars"(also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration)will follow

Twelve years later Bob Dylan was nominated for a Grammy, for a song titled "Dignity" copyrighted by Dylan in

1991.

Judge Simandle writes in his opinion concerning access "Plaintiff asserts that 'the bulk of his life's work' was

submitted to Sony beginning in 1982.(Complaint. At 2) . He also alleges that he was told to bring his songs to

several concerts which he attended courtesy of Sony. Plaintiff has produced evidence that after these concerts, he

was allowed backstage and gave his work to Dylan or his agents. (Damiano Declaration. At 2, 5, ; Deposition of

Pam Damiano at 77-84, 97-104: Deposition of Brad Wright at 105-112)."Taking these allegations as true, plaintiff

has demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendants had access to his work."

"Plaintiff asserts that 'the bulk of his life's work' was submitted to Sony beginning in 1982.(Complaint. At 2) . He

also alleges that he was told to bring his songs to several concerts which he attended courtesy of Sony. Plaintiff

has produced evidence that after these concerts, he was allowed backstage and gave his work to Dylan or his

agents. (Damiano Declaration. At 2, 5, ; Deposition of Pam Damiano at 77-84, 97-104: Deposition of Brad

Wright at 105-112)."Taking these allegations as true, plaintiff has demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact as

to whether defendants had access to his work."

Judge Simandle also states "This court will accept as true plaintiff's allegations that Sony represented to him that

he would be credited and compensated if Dylan used his work."

"This court will accept as true plaintiff's allegations that Sony represented to him that he would be credited and

compensated if Dylan used his work."

Doctor Green a musicologist who graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard University states that there is a

recurring vocal melody in the song "Dignity" released on Bob Dylan's 1994, MTV Unplugged album that is

strikingly similar to James Damiano's song "Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982

copyright registration) that was copyrighted in 1988 and recorded with studio musicians in 1986 and whom have

submitted declarations to the court.

To review doctor Greene's resume click on text

Doctor Green further states that the melodic arc found in both "Dignity" and "Steel Guitars"(also identified as

"Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration) Is more than just a collection of shared pitches. It

seems to embody the melodic shape or character of both compositions. When played on it's own, it sounds like

both compositions."

Someday maybe

You'll be able to tell

The greatest story

Say the greatest line

Give the greatest performance

Find the greatest find


165 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Damiano copyright 92"

Bob Dylan creation materials, produced March 1, 1996.

Defendants wrote to Judge Rosen :

"During discovery, Bob Dylan will be producing, inter alias, unpublished and extremely valuable tape recordings

and written lyrics which document the evolution and independent creation of Mr. Dylan's musical compositions

which are at issue in this case. These materials are highly confidential and proprietary in nature because they were

created during private, songwriting sessions. These materials have never been never been released to the public in

any manner."

Please note: The above letter of March 1, 1996 was sent to Judge Rosen only after Defendants and Plaintiff

exchanged copyrights to compare the date of registration for the respective songs at issue in this case.

In other words would defendants have had to write this letter to the court if Dylan's copyrights predated

Damiano's copyrights ?

The creation materials defense / Plaintiff's expert Doctor Green reports.

While Dylan and his attorneys claimed to have produced inter alias never before published Dylan creation

materials Doctor Green again asserts in his declaration:

"The [creation materials] tapes seem to document the experimentation with and creation of the lyrics, style and

instrumentation of "Dignity" but not the creation of the melody."

"Therefore I conclude that the melody of 'Dignity' was actually created before the production of the Dylan

creation tapes."

Doctor Green also states in his analysis:

" The musical features I find similar in "Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982

copyright registration) and "Dignity" therefore seem to me to be quite rare in the corpus of popular music."

"Of all the compositions I examined for this report, I find that the composition most similar to "Dignity" in terms

of the melodic and formal features specified in Section 1 is "Steel Guitars."

In Bright Tunes Music Corp. vs. Harrisongs Music Ltd., 420 F. Supp. 177 (SDNY 1976), aff'd. Abkco Music vs.

Harrisongs Music, 722 F 2d 988 (2nd Circuit 1983) , Beatle George Harrison unsuccessfully contended that the

phrases in question were trite. The Second Circuit upheld the lower court's finding of liability holding that it was

a question of fact as to whether the two works were similar in any substantial way. In Bright Tunes, the court

found that the repetition of two short, basic musical phrases, sol-la-do-la-do, created a "highly unique pattern"

sufficiently original to be protected by copyright, although each standing alone was in the public domain. 420 F.

Supp. at 178.

Plaintiff's argument about [public domain] is that the melodic arc in George Harrison's song was a common

melodic arc that had been played on the radio many times in many different songs. Harrison claimed that he must

have heard it on the radio and subliminally he wrote the song or that the melody line was a common musical or

blues clichï¿½.

However the court still found Harrison guilty and he lost the suit in court.


166 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

I was told forty eight people have been deposed in this litigation . Some of who were in Dylan's entourage.

When asked by plaintiff's attorney "Have you ever lied to Mr. Damiano?", Elliot Mintz a ten year associate of Bob

Dylan's who is responsible for Bob Dylan's media relations replied "Yes". Mr. Mintz's deposition is one hundred

and eighty seven pages long. Mr. Mintz also testified that he had almost a half a dozen conversations with James

Damiano and that after keeping James Damiano's songs for over a year he "Shredded" them.

Also stating under oath that he recalled giving Mr. Damiano his fax number. [page 67 par. 15]

By plaintiff's attorney:- Do you recall ever giving Mr. Damiano your fax number?

By Elliot Mintz - Yes.

Numerous recorded conversation between James Damiano, CBS and Dylan's entourage have been produced to

the defendants in this litigation. Discovery is well over three thousand pages.

Plaintiff's attorney asserts that : Professor Green also discovered from a review of the so called Dylan creation

materials that there are actually no Dylan creation materials for the melody at all. Professor Green states: "The

[creation materials] tapes seem to document the experimentation with and creation of the lyrics, style and

instrumentation of "Dignity", but not the creation of the melody. Therefore I conclude that the melody of

"Dignity" was actually created before the production of the Dylan creation tapes.

Professor Green concludes: "Because the shared melodic arc of James Damiano's "Steel Guitars (aka "Dignity")

and Bob Dylan's "Dignity" is rare in popular music, I conclude that similarities between the two songs are not due

to common incorporation of melodic clichï¿½s of the blues or folk-rock music. So, either Damiano and Dylan

arrived at similar melodies independently, or one musician was influenced by the other. Since "Steel Guitars"

predates both "Dignity" and the Dylan creation materials, and since the Dylan creation materials do not document

an independent creation of the "Dignity" melody, I conclude there is a very good chance that the melody

"Dignity" may be based on that of "Steel Guitars."(also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright

registration) .

"Dignity" was the "Hit" off both the "Bob Dylan Unplugged" album and the "Bob Dylan's Greatest Hits Volume

3" album.

Bob Dylan was in need of a commercially viable song. It had been twenty years since Bob Dylan released

"Knockin On Heaven's door" which was last hit song, released in 1974.

Since this law suit has been filed people tell me things that suggest that this is not the first time Dylan's songs

resembled other songwriterï¿½s songs.

One allegation suggests that Dylan's song "Shelter From the storm" is extremely similar to John Fogerty's song

"Down on the corner." Fogerty's song was released and being played on the air in 1969, Bob Dylan's song was

released in 1974. [Five years after John Fogerty's song was released] I was shocked after hearing the resemblance .

Another allegation suggests that "Knock, Knock, Knocking On Heaven's Door" released by Dylan in 1974 is very

similar to the song "Helpless, Helpless, Helpless" released by Neil Young in 1968. [Six years before Bob Dylan's

song was released]

Everyone someday finds out

Just how much faith

A man must have


167 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

So may the truth

Of your reality

Be in your own behalf

Copyright 88" Damiano

Plaintiff's also learned from deposition transcripts of other Dylan infringements and will they be produced upon

request of the court.

Review: Bob Dylan's Greatest Hits Volume 3

Released November 1994.

Trying to bring Dylan to the attention of the CD-buying audience of the Nineties, his record label again tried to

convert the indifferent mass market into purchasers. The title almost left room for legal action - only "Knockin'

On Heaven's Door" was a bona-fide hit. By no stretch of the imagination could the eleven minute "Brownsville

Girl" or nursery rhyme "Under The Red Sky" be termed "hits."

The necessary incentive for those who had everything anyway, was the inclusion of the contradictory "brand new

"Dylan classic" 'Dignity.' 'Dignity' was a rollicking , rock-a-billy chunk sliced off the "O-Mercy" sessions and

reproduced. It confirmed Dylan's inability to pronounce the word 'mirror' and a first for Bob -this name checked a

member of the British royal family. Otherwise Volume 3 was a satisfactory treading water exercise. Dignity was

nominated for a Grammy as the best Rock song of the year.

In a sworn deposition Elliot Mintz a ten year associate of Bob Dylan and Bob Dylan's media relationsï¿½ person

testified under oath :

"Under the subject of mistruths spoken to your client during these conversations, he would frequently ask me to

pass along information, ask questions about Bob, or to Bob about him. I in fact told him that I would and that I

did."

Elliot Mintz deposition [page 75par. 22]

By Steven M. Kramer - Do you recall saying the following to Mr. Damiano, sir - - You state at the top of the

page, or at least it appears that you that you state, "My job here is to pass along information to Bob." Do you

recall saying that sir?

By Mr. Mintz - Yes.

By Steven M. Kramer - Bob, of course is Bob Dylan?

By Elliot Mint - Yes.

Steven M. Kramer - Which I think I have." Do you see that sir?

By Mr. Mintz - Yes.

By Steven M. Kramer - Did you say that?

By Mr. Mintz - Yes.


168 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Mr. Mintz's deposition is 187 pages.

Only one in seven years.

Elliot Mintz deposition: - "First of all it is untrue secondly Bob Dylan does just fine he writes and sings his own

songs."

[The above statement was testified to on May, 30, 1996. It had been over five and a half years since Bob Dylan

released one newly written original song.]

In a span of seven years from 1990 to 1997, Bob Dylan released only one newly written original song titled

"Dignity."

All other songs besides "Dignity" released by Bob Dylan during this seven year span, were songs previously

released by Bob Dylan, traditional folk songs, and songs taken from songs in the public domain. 's attorneys ask

Judge Simandle permission to file a motion to hold James Damiano, in contempt of court for the use of this Web

site. September 5, 1997.

"As we advised your chambers yesterday, September 4, 1997, it has come to our clients' attention that plaintiff,

James Damiano, is using a website located at [email protected] to disseminate information about his claims

against Mr. Dylan and Sony."

"The purpose of this letter, therefore is to request leave of court to file a motion seeking to have plaintiff held in

contempt."

Judge Simandle incorrectly described the issues of fact in this law suit.

Judge Simandle opined in his decision that "Taking these allegations as true Plaintiff has demonstrated a genuine

issue of material fact as to whether defendants had access to his work."

The true issue of fact is that for years defendants CBS Records and Dylan associates, solicited Plaintiff James

Damiano's songs as specified in the complaint.

This solicitation more than suggests the "copying of "plaintiff James Damiano's songs. Although Plaintiff

Damiano's attorney did not submit much of the substantiating evidence to the court {why I don't know }

solicitation was still listed as an allegation. Judge Simandle never asked for any proof of that solicitation.

When you need not use

Your intelligence anymore

Your charm or your wit

Only then can you

pride yourself as being

the most

hypocritical hypocrite

Damiano Copyright 92


169 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

"My job here is to pass along information to Bob"...Elliot Mintz

Plaintiff has engaged in litigation with Bob Dylan for over five years and defendants have alleged to the court that

plaintiff committed fraud by trying to "extract" not "extort" but "extract" money from Bob Dylan.

Although Defendants suggest fraud as their defense, they do not back up their allegation with a counter suit. In

other words no counter suit or counter-claim has been filed by defendants and or Bob Dylan.

Any red blooded Attorney or Judge knows that if the defendants do not file a counter suit, this could only mean

that the issues of fact can not substantiate such a claim and that the defendants have no legitimate defense or

offense.

Bob Dylan has not public ally commented on this litigation.

A Diversion Of the truth

Defendants failure to contest the issues of solicitation creates a diversion of the truth so as to avoid having to

answer obligatory questions identifying the difference between Judge Simandle's description of Plaintiffs

demonstration of "access" as opposed to a more incriminating description of Plaintiffs demonstration of

Defendants "solicitation" of James Damiano's music.

Solicitation is actually what occurred.

It is these facts of solicitation which disable the defendants from filing a counter suit.

Please note that for everyday that this web site is up and running the fact is documented that the defendants do

not contest the issues of fact, the evidence of solicitation or the statements set forth in this web site declaration.

Therefore the reader can conclude that the statements and evidence set forth in this web site are true.

Otherwise Bob Dylan's attorneys would download this site, send it to Judge Simandle and then ask to hold James

Damiano in contempt.

Dylan's attorney's eventually downloaded Plaintiff's website and produced it to the court upon which Judge

Simandle eventually entered it upon the record during Plaintiff's hearing for contempt of violating Judge Joel B.

Rosenï¿½s confidentiality order.

The Impeachment of Elliot Mintz and Tony Tiller

Mr. Mintz's testimony is in blatant conflict of his own testimony.

Deposition of Elliot Mintz

Counsel for the plaintiff : Steven Kramer

Counsel for the Defendants : Orin Snyder

Witness: Elliot Mintz

The court should note that in a sworn videotaped deposition Elliot Mintz testified below.

The deposition of Elliot Mintz: [page 7 par. 2 through 23]


170 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

# 1. By Steven Kramer: Mr. Mintz, have you ever gone by an alias?

# 2. Mr. Mintz. Yes

# 3. By Steven Kramer: What is the alias?

# 4. Mr. Mintz. Mitch Burman.

# 5. By Steven Kramer: During what period of time have you gone under that alias?

# 6. Mr. Mintz: From approximately October of 1980 through present.

# 7. By Steven Kramer: Are there any documents that you have in your

possession, at your office or anywhere else that purport to identify you as Mitch Burman?

# 8. Mr. Mintz: No.

# 9. NOTE: Mr. Mintz testified that he went under an alias for sixteen years yet does have even one document in

his possession purporting to identify him as that alias.

# 10 By Steven Kramer: What is your profession, sir?

# 11 Mr. Mintz: I am a media consultant.

# 12 By Steven Kramer: How long has Mr. Dylan been your client sir?

# 13 Mr. Mintz: Since, I believe, October of 1986 approximately - - ten years. [Page 7 par. 22]

# 14 By Steven Kramer: Do you recall ever giving Mr. Damiano your fax number? [page 67 par. 15]

# 15 Elliot Mintz: Yes

# 16 By Steven Kramer: Thank you. When you need to reach Mr. Dylan, how do you reach him? [page 69 par. 3]

# 17 Elliot Mintz: I call him.

# 18 By Steven Kramer: At his home?

# 19 Elliot Mintz: If he is in Los Angeles, yes. If he is on the road I try and locate him that way. [page 69 par. 7]

# 20 At Mr. Mintz's deposition: [page 31 para. 22 through page 33 para. 13] Mr. Mintz testified:

# 21 By Steven Kramer: Have you ever spoken to Mr. Damiano?

# 22 Elliot Mintz: I have.

# 23 By Steven Kramer: Have you ever lied to Mr. Damiano?

# 24 Elliot Mintz: Yes.

# 25 By Steven Kramer: Can you list for me the times that you lied to him?


171 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

# 26 Elliot Mintz: First of all, all of my conversations with Mr. Damiano were telephonic. To the best of my

knowledge, I have never met him. During the course of these telephone conversation you are asking for specific

examples- -

# 27 NOTE: As per the testimony of Mr. Mintz, the record reflects that a conversation took place between Mr.

Mintz and Mr. Damiano in April of '91. This conversation was recorded on tape. In said conversation and in Mr.

Mintz own words he documents the date of the conversation by stating to Mr. Damiano So as of today, as of this

moment, as of the end of April 1991,". This conversation is chronologically important and of extreme importance

in it's context.

# 28 NOTE. Mr. Mintz testified to being in correspondence with Mr. Damiano, one and a half years prior to this

recorded conversation. [Mr. Mintz also testified to being in correspondence one year and five months after this

conversation. A total of two years and eleven months of correspondence between Mr. Mintz and Mr. Damiano.]

# 29 By Steven Kramer: Now, and I think your counsel has shown you the spot on the transcript that I am

referring to, that I have in my notes. In April of "91, do you remember stating to Mr. Damiano, sir, "I remember

talking to you very clearly a year and a half ago, and part of getting on the right track would be never calling this

number at the hour you called over the weekend." Do you recall saying that? [page 72 par. 19]

# 30 Mr. Mintz: I do.

# 31 Second the court should please note that Mr. Mintz's statement "I remember talking to you very clearly a

year and a half ago", documents Mr. Mintz's involvement with James Damiano one and a half years prior to Mr.

Mintz's statement. A study of the context of this statement and viewed chronologically is of vital importance in

evaluating the credibility of Mr. Mintz's testimony and will be referred to later in this brief.

# 32 Also, Mr. Mintz's statement "part of getting on the right track would be" is a clear cut statement informing

Mr. Damiano, that Mr. Mintz, believes that Mr. Damiano is capable of getting on the right track.

# 33 Not only does Mr. Mintz testify to admitting that Mr. Damiano is capable of getting on the right track, he

even proceeds to tells him what not to do to get on that track. "Part of getting on the right track would be never

calling this number at the hour you called over the weekend."

# 34 Not ironically, Mr. Mintz also states to Mr. Damiano in this same conversation "So I'm hoping that this

conversation will be our last one with respect to this matter." The court should ask what other matter would Mr.

Mintz have with Mr. Damiano?

# 35 Referring to the same April 1991 recorded conversation between Mr. Mintz and Mr. Damiano, Mr. Mintz

testified:

# 36 By Steven Kramer: But you knew from conversations with Mr. Damiano, did you not, sir, that he had

consulted lawyers about his claims? In fact, when he told you that, you made comments that connoted some

feeling that you wanted to not have any further contact with him. Would that be fair? [page 50 par.]

# 37 Elliot Mintz: I recall him mentioning to me that he had consulted an attorney. Once he said that he had

consulted an attorney. I thought that, that would be an appropriate point for us not to have any additional

conversations.[page 50 par. 9]

# 38 Mr. Mintz's testimony reflects conflict: This testimony compared chronologically reflects total conflict:

# 39 Mr. Mintz's first testimony, "I remember talking to you very clearly a year and a half ago."[circa April 1991]

, documents correspondence between Mr. Mintz and Mr. Damiano as far back as November of 1989, one and a


172 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

half years prior to Mr. Mintz testifying that he thought April 1991 " was an appropriate point to not have any

additional conversations" with Mr. Damiano.

# 40 Why did Mr. Mintz, keep in correspondence with Mr. Damiano from November of 1989 to April of 1991.

# 41 Even more ironic and revealing of Mr. Mintz's involvement with Mr. Damiano is the fact that even after Mr.

Mint testified that he thought April 1991 was an appropriate point to not have any additional conversations with

Mr. Damiano, he still in fact did keep in correspondence with Mr. Damiano. Mr. Mintz testified to the fact that he

was still having conversations with Mr. Damiano in October of 1992. If Mr. Mintz thought to not have any

additional conversations with Mr. Damiano why did he proceed to do so?

# 42 Of equal importance is what was discussed between Mr. Damiano and Mr. Mintz during this period.

Testimony reflects that Mr. Mintz's testimony is once again in blatant conflict: Let's look at this statement once

again

# 43 Elliot Mintz: "Once he said that he had consulted an attorney, I thought that would be an appropriate point

to not have any additional conversations."

# 44 Note . The fact remains that Mr. Mintz did indeed keep on talking to Mr. Damiano until October of 1992.

# 45 Comparing Mr. Mintz's April 1991 statement to Mr. Damiano "I remember talking to you very clearly a year

and a half ago" [circa 1991] to Mr. Mintz's testimony " I thought that would be an appropriate point to not have

any additional conversations" [referring to circa April 1991] , one must ask why Mr. Mintz was talking to Mr.

Damiano one and a half years prior to thinking the thought "I thought that would be an appropriate point to not

have any additional conversations."

# 46 One can conclude that Mr. Mintz is not telling the truth :Let us compare side by side what Mr. Mintz

testified to saying to Mr. Damiano to what he testified to in his sworn deposition:

Statement # 1 Statement # 2

[Circa April 1991] [Circa April 1991]

"I remember talking to you "I thought that would be an

very clearly a year and a appropriate point to not

have half ago" have any additional

conversations."

# 47 Statement # 3 Statement # 4

Part of getting on the right "I thought that would be

track would be never calling an appropriate point

this number at the hour you to not have any additional

you called over the weekend." conversations."

# 48 Note: This "I remember talking to you very clearly a year and a half ago and part of getting on the right track

would be never calling this number at the hour you called over the weekend" was stated to Mr. Damiano by Mr.

Mintz in the April 1991 recorded conversation." Mr. Mintz also testified to having almost a half a dozen

conversations with Mr. Damiano: [page 131 par. 25 through 132 par. 25]

# 49 By Steven Kramer: When I just said, when you said you said in the transcript that you discussed it with Mr.

Dylan, that would be a lie; correct?

# 50 Elliot Mintz: Correct.


173 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

# 51 By Steven Kramer When you said to Mr. Damiano that Mr. Dylan had no recollection of receiving those

things, that was a lie?

# 52 Elliot Mintz: Correct.

# 53 By Steven Kramer: When you said that Mr. Dylan told you that he did not take any songs, that was a lie?

# 54 Elliot Mintz: Correct

# 55. By Steven Kramer: When you said - - just to speed this up, at 152, the top of the page. When you said to

Mr. Damiano, "I can't help out more than I have helped out. We have had almost a half a dozen conversations. I

have asked Bob - - "That is Bob Dylan?

# 56 Elliot Mintz: Yes, sir.

# 57 By Steven Kramer: "I have asked Bob the questions that you wanted to have asked to Bob." That was a lie:

correct?


# 59 Continuing into the deposition of Elliot Mintz and comparing the statements made to James Damiano by Mr.

Mintz as opposed to his sworn testimony .

Let us compare:

# 60 Statement # 5 Statement #6

Date of statement April 1991 Referring to April 1991

"Part of getting on the right "I thought that would be an

track would be never calling appropriate point for us

this number at the hour you not to have any additional

called over the weekend." conversations."

# 61 Mr. Mintz's statement "Part of getting on the right track would be" clearly displays Mr. Mintz's intentions to

have further correspondence with Mr. Damiano.

# 62 Mr. Mintz also does not ask Mr. Damiano, to not call him any more. "Part of getting on the right track would

be never calling this number at the hour you called over the weekend."


Date of statement April 1991 Referring to April 1991

" I have asked the questions " I thought than would be an

that you wanted to have appropriate point for us

asked to Bob." not to have any additional

conversations."

# 64 Note: The court should also note that this testimony by Mr. Mintz, documents that as far back as November

of 1989, Mr. Mintz was having correspondence with James Damiano yet, in October of 1992 one month shy of

three years later Elliot Mintz testified to still having conversations with Mr. Damiano even though Mr. Mintz

testified :


174 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

# 65 Once again Mr. Mintz's testimony is in direct conflict. Mr. Mintz testified to admitting that in an April 1991

conversation with James Damiano, after Mr. Damiano mentioned the word attorney to him Mr. Mintz, concluded

that he should not have any more contact with Mr. Damiano yet, Mr. Mintz testified that a year and a half later,

in April 1991 he was still talking to James Damiano.

# 66 By Steven Kramer: When was the last time you recall you have spoken to Mr. Damiano, sir? [page 173 par.

11]

# 67 Elliot Mintz: What does the transcript reflect? The tape, what date did he affix to it? I will go by whatever he

put on the page. It seemed accurate to me.

# 68 [Note] Mr. Mintz's testimony "Once he said that he had consulted an attorney, I thought that would be an

appropriate point for us not to have any additional conversations" is in reference to the April 1991 recorded

phone conversation between James Damiano and Elliot Mintz. Mr. Mintz's testimony reveals that in prior

conversation the word "attorney" had not been mentioned by Mr. Damiano. [As per Mintz deposition] [emph.

added]

# 69 [NOTE] Also as per Mr. Mintz's testimony that if the word had been mentioned Mr. Mintz would not have

had any more correspondence with Mr. Damiano.

# 70 By Steven Kramer: The second transcript, I believe is October '92, if I am not mistaken. Is it your testimony

that the last time you spoke to Mr. Damiano was October of 1992, sir?

# 71 Elliot Mintz: I don't recall any conversations with Mr. Damiano after this.

# 72 By Steven Kramer: Let's see if that is the last date that appears on this transcript

# 73 Elliot Mintz: Sure.

# 74 By Mr. Snyder: The last date that appears on a transcribed conversation is October 2 of 1992. That is bates

stamped 227 and 228.

# 75 By Mr. Kramer: Is it your testimony, sir, that you have not spoken to Mr. Damiano since October of '92.

# 76 Mr. Mintz: I have no recollection of it no. [page 174 par. 9]

# 77 Mr. Mint testified to being in correspondence with Mr. Damiano for a total of two years and eleven months,

one month shy of three years, between the dates of November 1989 to October of 1992.

# 78 By Steven Kramer: Do you recall stating the following to Mr. Damiano, sir? This is regarding some faxes that

he sent to you. So you have it in context. He asks you the following question: "Are you going to send me my

songs back that I faxed to you?" And you replying, "Uh, they wouldn't even show up on the fax, because the

quality of the original faxes came through to me - - in other words, they didn't print out that well. They will just

be kept in a safe place." Do you remember saying that to Mr. Damiano? [page 47 par. 5]

# 79 Mr. Mintz: I do recall saying that.

# 80 By Steven Kramer: Was that a lie?

# 81 Mr. Mintz. No.

# 82 By Mr. Kramer: What safe place were they kept in?


175 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

# 83 Mr. Mintz: In a file cabinet.

# 84 By Steven Kramer: Are they still there?

# 85 Mr. Mintz. No.

# 86 By Steven Kramer: I'm sorry . Are they in existence?

# 87 Mr. Mintz: No

# 88 By Steven Kramer: Were they destroyed?

# 89 Elliot Mintz: The only way I can answer the question is to let you know that when the faxes originally came

through my machine, the printing was virtually illegible for one reason or another. [Page 48 para 12]

# 90 At page 48 paragraph 12, of his sworn deposition Mr. Mintz changes his testimony testifies' to the fact that

the faxes came through his machine hit the air then disappeared. Faxes don't normally do that.

# 91 Comparing Mr. Mintz's statement "for one reason or another" to what he next testified to at page 50

paragraph 23, of his sworn deposition, one must wonder why Mr. Mintz suddenly had a compelling need to

explain why the faxes from Mr. Damiano were allegedly illegible.

# 92 Mr. Mintz first testified to "The print was virtually illegible for one reason or another

# 93 In Mr. Mintz's next testimony regarding the quality of the Mr. Damiano's faxes to him, Mr. Mintz states "The

papers that I had destroyed were illegible papers as a result of the disappearing fax ink process."

# 94 May we compare the two statements side by side:


1. "For one reason or 2. As a result of the

another" disappearing fax ink

process"

# 96 Statement # 1. Mr. Mintz's statement # 2 reveals doubt as to why the faxes were allegedly illegible however

in Mr. Mintz testimony at statement # 2 he claims to not know why the faxes were illegible. It is this change in

Mr. Mint'z testimony that reveals and documents Mr. Mintz dishonesty, total disregard for the truth, and his

attempt to mislead the court.

Again quote : "For one reason or another"

# 97 Statement # 2. Mr. Mintz's statement, reveals no doubt as to the alleged reason the faxes were allegedly

illegible. Why?

Again quote : " As a result of the disappearing

fax ink process.

# 98 Why is Mr. Mintz's first testimony different than his second?

# 99 May we now compare more of Mr. Mintz's testimony. Not only did Mr. Mintz change his testimony

concerning the alleged reason that the faxes were allegedly illegible, but he also changed his testimony


176 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

concerning the alleged description and condition of Mr. Damiano's faxes.

# 100 Mr. Mintz changed his testimony after testifying that the faxes were "virtually illegible" to "The papers that

I had destroyed were illegible papers as a result of the disappearing fax ink process." [page 50 para. 23]

# 101 Mr. Mintz's testimony at [50. 23] leaves an open question as to whether or not the faxes had print on them

him when he proceeded to file them in a file cabinet in his office. However sooner or later Mr. Mintz will have to

define the word "virtually" to the court and answer yes or no to whether there was readable print on the faxes that

came out of his machine. Either way even though he's changed his testimony from one statement, to another, to

another Plaintiff needs not say anymore and the court should grant a motion for the impeachment of Mr. Mintz as

a witness.

# 102 Note: Mr. Mintz will have to decide which one of his testimonies he would like to choose for the jury to

believe. The first: "Uh, they wouldn't even show up on the fax" the second: "In other words they didn't print out

that well" The third: "They were virtual illegible" or the fourth : "The papers that I had destroyed were illegible

papers as a result of the disappearing fax ink process." Mr. Mintz's testimony at page [50 para. 23]

# 103 It is my understanding that it would take at least seven years for the ink to disappear on a fax if not ten

years. I'm sure Dylan's management uses all state of the art equipment which is years ahead of its time. In fact the

Plaintiff still has in his possession the original fax receipts, documenting exact date of which the referenced faxes

are referred , and the print is still to this date and five years later extremely legible .Let us compare Mr. Mintz's

testimony side by side.

# 104 Let us compare:


October 1992 April 1991

" In other words they didn't " I thought that was an

print out that well they'll appropriate point to not

just be kept in a safe place" to not have any additional

conversations."

# 105 Then to top it all off Mr. Mintz testified that he took those blank pieces of paper, and put them in a file

cabinet until he decided to destroy them by shredding them four or five years later.

# 106 By Steven Kramer: You use the word "shred," is it that you shredded those documents, sir? [page 174 para.

14]

# 107 Elliot Mintz: Yes. As a matter of course, I shred all of my documents.

# 108 Please note not to mention the fact that Mr. Mintz destroyed the faxes anyway.

# 109 Relating back to Mr. Mintz's admission of stating to James Damiano "Uh, they wouldn't even show up on

the fax, because the quality of the original faxes, came through to me, in other words they didn't print out that

well."

# 110 A jury would have to believe that Mr. Mintz, eluding to the fact that he said to Mr. Damiano "Uh, they

wouldn't even show up on the fax," is blatantly in direct conflict with another statement made by Mr. Mintz in the

very same paragraph referring to the faxes when he testified that he stated to Mr. Damiano "in other words they

didn't print out that well"

# 111 There is a blatant conflict between the phrase "Print out that well" and "They wouldn't even show up on


177 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

the fax". Let us compare side by side what exactly Mr. Mintz did testify to saying:

Statement #13 Statement # 14

"They wouldn't even "They didn't print out

show up on the fax." that well"

# 112 To conclude that there is no difference between the four statements is absurd. It was only later, in his

deposition, that Mr. Mintz developed the idea and took the position that the faxes did not print out at all and that

they were "virtually illegible for one reason or another" which is in blatant conflict to what he testified to saying

to James Damiano that "They didn't print out that well" to "They wouldn't even show up on the fax" to what he

testified to the second time in his deposition that "The papers that I had destroyed were illegible papers as a result

of the disappearing fax ink process."

# 113 There is no difference between changing a testimony and changing a story, However there is no way to

change the truth.

# 114 The fact that Mr. Mintz initially testified to the fact that he stated that " The faxes did not print out 'that

well'" is a blatant admission that the faxes did indeed print out, if not as good as a freshly typed page, at least to

the extend that they would be recognizable enough for someone to at least able to identify who the faxes came

from. Any juror could conclude by Mr. Mintz's statement that these two statements made by Mr. Mintz are in

direct conflict of each other. This is a blatant lie spoken by, admitted by, and testified to by Elliot Mintz.

# 115 The blatancy of the conflicting testimony within the deposition of this witness in an insult to the integrity

of this court.

# 116 Mr. Mintz then testified he said to Mr. Damiano concerning Mr. Damiano's materials "so they will just be

kept in a safe place".

# 117 There would be no reason to keep twelve pieces of blank paper in a safe place which brings us to the next

blatant lie of Mr. Mintz.

# 118 If all of the above does not convince the court that Mr. Mintz is a blatant chronic liar perhaps more

conflictive testimony will reinforce the nature of his disgraceful integrity.

# 119 Other testimony that goes even further than far beyond just a suggestion of Mr. Mintz's dishonesty is the

fact that, if there was nothing on the page, how would Mr. Mintz, know the faxes were sent to him by Mr.

Damiano or someone associated to Mr. Damiano.

# 120 Mr. Mintz testified to the fact that he knew the faxes were sent by Mr. Damiano or someone associated

with Mr. Damiano.

# 121 By Steven Kramer: Let me make sure I am clear, so the record is clear. You don't dispute the fact that these

were, in fact, and I think you have said it, they came from Mr. Damiano? Yes, these documents, these pieces of

paper? [page 54 para. 3]

# 122 Elliot Mintz: They came through my fax machine. Could I say for an absolute certainty that they came from

Mr. Damiano, I couldn't say for an absolute certainty. It would be my guess that he sent them to me. It could have

come from somebody else, somebody who he was involved with possibly.

# 123 Other sworn testimony from Mr. Mintz's secretary Ms. Capre again goes of even further beyond just a

suggestion of Mr. Mintz's dishonorable, disgraceful disregard for the truth. Mr. Mintz's own secretary Ms. Capre

testified that she could read the faxed material from Mr. Damiano:


178 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

# 124 By Steven Kramer: Do you remember receiving any faxes from Mr. Damiano, my client?

# 125 Ms. Capre: I do recall receiving a fax from him, but I did not - -have time to look at it. It did not relate to

what I was currently working on. We got a lot of faxes each day. Unless it pertained to me, in something that I

was working on, I wouldn't have time to read it and I would just put it on his desk. [Capre deposition page 14

para. 18]

# 126 No where in Ms. Capre's testimony does she state that the faxes were illegible. It is obvious that she had no

problem reading the fax from Mr. Damiano. Ms. Capre's testimony is in direct conflict with Mr. Mintz's statement

"They wouldn't even show up on the fax" to They didn't print out that well", and "They were virtually illegible."

again reiterating the degree of Mr. Mintz's dishonesty.

# 127 May we again compare the two different testimonies:


# 128 Mr. Capre's Mr. Mintz's testimony

testimony

"I do recall receiving a fax "They were virtually

from him" illegible"

# 129 This blatant obvious, conflictive testimony does not end there. Mr. Mintz on to testify :

# 130 Mr. Mintz then testified: With respect to the fax paper, I don't think it would make any difference at all. In

retrospect, if I came in here with 12 blank pieces of paper.

# 131 Mr. Mintz's sworn testimony at page 50 para. 9 is again in blatant conflict with his sworn testimony

# 132 By Steven Kramer: But you knew from conversations with Mr. Damiano, did you not, sir, that he had

consulted lawyers about his claims? In fact, when he told you, you made comments that connoted some feelings

that you wanted to not have any further contact with him. Would that be fair?

# 133 Elliot Mintz: I recall him mentioning to me that he had consulted an attorney. Once he said that he had

consulted an attorney. I thought that that would be an appropriate point for us not to have any additional

conversations.

# 134 Once again Mr. Mintz changes his testimony:

# 135 By Steven Kramer: As of the time he said, "these people befriended me for eleven years, " did you

understand these people that he is referring to, he was talking to people at CBS?

# 136 Elliot Mintz: Referring to the transcript, in his own words, he does not say these people at CBS." Mr.

Mintz is correct. They are not Mr. Damiano's words. The actual person who spoke the words "these people at

CBS" were Mr. Mintz himself quote "but if you have some kind of legal problem with CBS then get the attorneys

to contact these people at CBS.".....[page 128 para 7]

# 137 By Steven Kramer: Who did you think he meant before you jumped to the opinion that he was delusional?

Who did you think he meant by these people"? [page 128 para. 8]

# 138 Elliot Mintz: It was my feeling that he was associating himself with people he claims over a period of

eleven years. What kind of people. I don't know other fans perhaps."


179 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

# 139 By Steven Kramer: Did you have any idea who he meant by "these people befriended me for eleven years"?

Yes or no?

# 140 Elliot Mintz: Did I have a specific idea as to who these people were that he was talking about, no.

# 141 Let us compare two statements testified to by Mr. Mintz:

# 142 Statement # 17 Statement # 18 "Did I have a specific idea as "But if you have some kind

to who these people were he legal problem with CBS

was talking about, no." get the attorney's to

contact these people at CBS." The Deposition continues:

# 143 By Mr. Mintz: "Did I have a specific idea as to who these people were he was talking about, no.

# 144 Steven Kramer: Yet you are telling the jury that even without a semblance of an idea of who he was meant,

you cite that statement, "these people befriended me for eleven years.' as evidence of Mr. Damiano suffering from

a delusional? [page 128 para. 22]

The absurdity continues:

# 145 By Steven Kramer: Do you recall saying the following to Mr. Damiano, sir - - You state at the top of the

page, or at least it appears that you state, "My job here is to pass along information to Bob." Do you recall saying

that sir? [page 75 par. 10]

# 146 Mr. Mintz: Yes.

# 147 By Steven Kramer: bob , of course, is Bob Dylan?

# 148 By: Elliot Mintz: Yes

# 149 By Steven Kramer: You say "Which I think I have." Do you see that sir?


# 151 By Steven Kramer: Did you say that?

# 152 Mr. Mintz: Yes

# 153 May we now once again compare Mr. Mintz's testimony. Mr. Mintz testified to having the transcribed

conversation with Mr. Damiano. A side by side comparison reveals the nature of Mr. Mintz's dishonesty:


"My job here is to pass along " In my opinion Mr. Damiano

information to Bob." was at the time of these telephone conversations delusional # 155 Deposition continued:

# 156 Statement # 21 Statement # 22 "Which I think I have." " I thought that would be an appropriate point to

not have any additional conversations" # 157 By Steven Kramer: ....to exhaust your recollection and tell the jury

every time you lied to Mr. Damiano. Then I will ask you, have you now exhausted your recollect, so I hear

everything now.

# 158 Elliot Mintz: To the best of my recollection, I may have lied to Mr. Damiano when I have told him, "I cant'


180 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

talk with you any further, I have another call pending." I would be on the telephone and I would be buzzed and

I'd tell him, "Something very important has come up, I cannot continue this." Many times, not many times, but on

those occasions when he would ask me to pass along information to Mr. Dylan, I may have said to him, "I will try

to pass it along," or words to that effect.[page 32. para. 25 through page 33 para. 11.]

# 159 NOTE: Please note that these statements were only a some of many statements made to Mr. Damiano, and

recorded on tape.

# 160 By Steven Kramer: "What are your duties -- what have been your duties with Mr. Dylan in the last ten

years, sir?

# 161 Elliot Mintz responded: My duties fall under two basic categories. One is to function as a media

relationï¿½s person or press person between Bob and the media. "The second is to deal with what we refer to as

delusional fans, problematic people who enter Mr. Dylan's life." [Page 10 par. 18 of deposition]

# 162 By Steven Kramer Are you telling the jury that Mr. Damiano was delusional? Yes or no? I want the answer

to that question please. If you would be so kind. Yes or no, was Mr. Damiano delusional?

# 163 Elliot Mintz responded: In my opinion, Mr. Damiano was at the time of these conversations delusional.

[page 82 par. 16]

# 164 May we now compare Mr. Mintz's testimony:

# 165 Statement # 23 Statement # 24 "In my opinion Mr. Damiano "Many times, not many times was at the time

of theses but on those occasions, when conversations delusional." he would ask me to pass along along

information to Mr. Dylan I may have said to him "I will try to pass it along." # 166 Mr. Mintz's Testimony: [page

45 para. 20]

# 167 By Elliot Mintz: Under the subject of mistruths spoken to your client, during the course of these telephone

conversations, he would frequently ask me to pass along information, ask questions about Bob, or to Bob about

him. I, in fact told him that I would and that I did."

# 168 Let us compare the irony of Mr. Mintz's testimony:

# 169 Statement # 25 Statement # 26 "In my opinion Mr. Damiano "On those occasions when he was at the time

of these would ask me to pass along conversations delusional." information to Mr. Dylan, I may have said to him

I'll try and pass it along or words to that effect. # 170 Mr. Mintz testified to the jury that he thought Mr. Damiano

was delusional yet he told Mr. Damiano that he was passing along what something of Mr. Damiano's to Bob

Dylan. Whether Mr. Mintz identifies that something as information the fact is Mr. Mintz testified that he had in

his possession Mr. Damiano's songs. Once again Mr. Mintz's testimony:

# 171 1. "My job here is to pass along information to Bob."

# 172 2. "Which I think I have"

# 173 3. I have asked Bob the questions that you wanted to have asked to Bob. Comparison of testimony:

# 174 Statement # 27 Statement # 28 "I have asked Bob the "It is my opinion that Mr. questions that you wanted

Damiano was at the time to have asked to Bob." of these conversations delusional." # 175 Statement # 29

Statement # 30 "I have relayed the messages " In my opinion Mr. that you wanted then to relay Damiano was at

the time of to Bob." these conversations, delusional." # 176 Statement # 31 Statement # 32 "In my opinion Mr.

Damiano "It is, my job here to pass was at the time of these along information to Bob." conversations delusional."

# 177 Mr. Mintz testified:[page 6 para. 3 through para. 25]


181 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

# 178 By Steven Kramer: Do you have any formal training sir?

# 179 Elliot Mintz: In psychiatry, no.

# 180 By Steven Kramer: Psychology?

# 181 Elliot Mintz: No.

# 182 By Steven Kramer: Have you taken any seminars in psychology, psychiatry or mental health?

# 183 Mr. Mintz: No

# 184 By Steven Kramer: Have you written any books about it ?

# 185 Elliot Mintz: No.

# 186 This testimony by Mr. Mintz goes without saying nor having to say anything about credibility:

# 187 Further testimony: There is no answer for this absurd testimony of Mr. Mintz. Mr. Mintz's testimony id in

blatant conflict with each and every one of these statements made by Mr. Mintz in his sworn deposition. How

many more lies will it take to dig Mr. Mintz out of this web of lies.

# 188 By Steven Kramer: You continue. "I have relayed the messages that you wanted to then relay to Bob." Got

that? That was a lie? [page 132 para. 11]


# 190 Let us compare:

# 191 Statement # 33 Statement # 34 " I have relayed the messages "I thought that would be you wanted then to

relay an appropriate point Bob." to not have any additional conversations." # 192 How the court allows this

absurdity to continue is beyond all imagination however this is a documented account of the record

# 193 By Steven Kramer: When you said that to Mr. Damiano, "Which I think I have" were you lying to him?

[page 76 par 21]

# 194 Mr. Mintz: I was misstating the truth because- -

# 195 By Steven Kramer: Going further down, sir. About midway, you say - - let's just put this in context. James

Damiano says, "You do remember about a year ago when I was at work, about a year and a half ago, when I was

at work and I asked you if you knew of anything, remember, you said Bob Dylan had the songs in his suitcase and

that he was going to read them." The transcript states you said "No, I never said that?" Then Mr. Damiano says,

you don't remember saying that? Then you say, "No, I did not say that. I remember our conversation, because I

checked my notes, that you said you gave some songs to a bus driver who claims he put them on Bob's bus." Did

you say those things? [page 77 par. 18]

# 196 Elliot Mintz: Did I say those things to Mr. Damiano?

# 197 By Steven Kramer: Yes



182 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

# 199 By Steven Kramer: When you say, "I checked my notes," were you lying to him?

# 200 Elliot Mintz: I was not speaking the truth correct.

# 201 By Steven Kramer: Assuming the date to be correct, sir, would it be fair to state that you comment at page

148, towards the bottom of that paragraph, "Now if you feel that in some way you have been wronged here and

you have spoken to attorneys about this, I am not a lawyer an I am not in a position to make any legal judgment,

but if you have some kind of a legal problem with CBS, get the attorneys to contact these people at CBS." would

it be fair to state that you made that statement, if we are just trying to pinpoint what came first, the chicken or the

egg, that statement came before apparently years before, four years before you destroyed the documents: correct?

# 202 Mr. Mintz: Oh the faxes that disappeared, yes. Years before. Years before.

# 203 By Steven Kramer: When you said that to him were you being sincere?

# 204 Mr. Mintz: I was not being sincere. [page 121 par. 1 to 5]

# 205 Although Mr. Mintz is testifying that he lied to Mr. Damiano in an attempt to save face and make it appear

that he is retracting all his statements of solicitation Mr. Mintz's is once again in blatant conflict with his

testimony.

# 206 Let's compare the two different testimonies:

# 207 By Steven Kramer: I would like to ask you in point of time, Mr. Mintz, if you would, sir, whether the

statement that you made on page 148 occurred before or after you destroyed the faxes that you referred to earlier?

# 208 By Mr. Snyder: You are referring now to the document that begins with Bates stamp No. 143?

# 209 By Steven Kramer: Referring - -

# 210 By Mr. Snyder: Well, does the documents begin at 143?

# 211 By Steven Kramer: I don't know. I pulled it out.

# 212 Mr. Snyder: It does and it is dated April, 1991. It comes from a document dated April, 1991.

# 213 By Steven Kramer: Assuming the date to be correct, sir, would it be fair to state that your comment at page

148, towards the bottom of that paragraph , "Now if you feel that in some way you have been wronged here, and

you have spoken to attorneys about this, I am not a lawyer, and I am not in a position to make any legal judgment,

but if you have some kind of legal problem with CBS, get the attorneys to contact these people at CBS," [circa

April, 1991] would it be fair to state that you made that statement, if we are just trying to pinpoint what came first

the chicken or the egg, that statement came before, four years before you destroyed the documents: correct? [pg.

119 through 120 par. ]

# 214 Elliot Mintz: Oh, the faxes that disappeared, yes. Years before. Years before.

# 215 When comparing the absurdity of Mr. Mintz's conflicting testimony " But if you have some kind of legal

problem with CBS, get the attorneys to contact these people at CBS." to Mr. Mintz's testimony at [ page 128

para. 6] "Referring to the transcript, in his own words he does not say these people at CBS" to Mr. Mintz's

testimony on page 119 & 120 "but if you have some kind of legal problem with CBS, then get the attorneys to

contact these people at CBS" is blatant proof that Mr. Mintz cannot keep his lies straight.

This changed testimony is reason enough for the impeachment of Mr. Mintz as a crucial witness and definite


183 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

grounds for reversal. Compared below side by side are the two statements:

# 216 Statement # 35 Statement # 36 "In his own words he does not "but if you have some kind of he does not

say these people legal problem with CBS, then these people at CBS." get the attorneys to contact these people at

CBS."

# 217 And once again testimonial conflict:

# 218 Statement # 37 Statement # 38 "It is my opinion that "but If you have some legal Mr. Damiano was at

problem with CBS, then get the time of these the attorneys to contact these conversations, was people at CBS."

delusional.

# 219 Mr. Mintz's emphatically continues to perjure himself: Additional testimony attempting to explain Mr.

Mintz's involvement with James Damiano proves to be in direct conflict with his initial testimony is transcribed

below. Once again Mr. Mintz changes his testimony:

# 220 By Steven Kramer: [page 132 para. 16] Going to 153, you agree with me that this statement at the bottom,

your last statement, quote - - in point of time, "Then you have got a real gripe with them. With these people. That

is who you have the gripe with." You made that statement before you destroyed the faxes: correct?

# 221 Elliot Mintz: These conversations were recorded in 1991?

# 222 By Steven Kramer: Yes I just want the jury to be clear about the point of time that all these statements were

made prior to the destruction of the documents: correct?

# 223 Elliot Mintz: That is true. Yes.

# 224 Back tracking to what Mr. Mintz testified to saying to Mr. Damiano "Then you have a real gripe with them.

These people. That is who you have the gripe with" and comparing it to Mr. Mintz's testimony at page 128

paragraph 6 "referring to the transcript, in his own word he does not say these people at CBS", Mr. Mintz then

suddenly once again changes his testimony from his very previous testimony and answers Mr. Kramer's next

question:

# 225 By Steven Kramer: [page 128 para. 8] Who did you think he meant before you jumped to the opinion that

he was delusional?

# 226 Elliot Mintz: It was my feeling that he was associating with people he claims over a period of eleven years.

What kind of people, I don't know. Other fans perhaps. They tend to gravitate to each other. We notice that

profiles live with one another.

# 227 It is obvious that Mr. Mintz just lies whenever he feels. Let us compare Mr. Mintz's testimony side by side:

# 228 Statement # 39 Statement # 40 "Then you have a real gripe "Other fans perhaps" with them. These people.

That is who you have the gripe with." # 229 Blatant conflict:

# 330 Statement # 41 Statement # 42 "But if you have some kind of "Other fans perhaps" legal problems with

CBS then get the attorneys to contact these people at CBS."

# 331 The absurdity of Mr. Mintz's conflictive testimony is as highly an insult as a spit in the face. Let's go

further:

# 332 As of the time he (James Damiano) said, "These people befriended me for eleven years, " did you

understand these people that he was referring to, he was referring to people at CBS? He wasn't talking to people


184 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

at a car dealership or play baseball with him?

# 333 Elliot Mintz: Referring to the transcript in his own words he does not say these people at CBS.

# 334 By Steven Kramer: Who did you think he (James Damiano) meant before you jumped to the opinion that

he was delusional? Who did you think he meant by " these people"?

# 335 Mr. Mintz: "It was my feeling that he was associating with people he claims over a period of eleven years.

What kind of people, I don't know. Other fans perhaps. They tend to gravitate to each other. We notice that

profiles live with one another."

# 336 Beside a tremendous lack appreciation of the mere people who buy Dylan's albums and buy Bob Dylan

concert tickets, and besides Mr. Mintz's again changing testimony Plaintiff notes to the court that, Mr. Mintz's

testimony is once again aversive, and in blatant conflict with his prior testimony.

# 337 On October 10th, 1992 in a recorded phone conversation between James Damiano and Mr. Mintz, and in

which Mr. Mintz testified to having with James Damiano the record and transcript reflects:

# 338 Mr. Mintz : James, I spoke to that man at CBS yesterday and I explained to him that there is nothing I can

do. That I cannot deliver any written material to Bob.

# 339 Mr. Damiano: The songs that I sent to you did you think they were any good?

# 340 Mr. Mintz: I cannot render an opinion 'cause I have nothing to do with songwriting. It's not what I do. I'm

the wrong guy to ask. I'm technically not in the music business. I don't know anything about them. But in terms of

presenting any unsolicited material and sending it over to Bob, that is something I am not legally allowed not to

do. I explained it to that man I spoke to yesterday as well."

# 341 Mr. Damiano: To Anthony?

# 342 Mr. Mintz: To Anthony and asked Anthony to explain it to you also.

# 343 Mr. Damiano: So, Bob won't get to see blind leading the Blind?

# 344 Mr. Mintz: Correct. In other words, there's a standard practice with all musicians, well, I won't say with all

musicians, but I know with Bob that he's not allowed to look at unsolicited material. This is what avoids any

technical problems in the future."

# 345 Not ironically in the same October 10th, 1992 recorded conversation when asked by Mr. Damiano "Right I

see, The number that you gave me is that in your home?"

# 356 Mr. Mintz responded: "They all go to an answering service and the answering service cross connects to

where ever I happen to be."

# 347 Continuing the conversation:

# 348 Mr. Damiano: So, if I faxed you something, you'll get it tonight?

# 349 Mr. Mintz: Yes but if its another song, the response will be the same. I can't physically send it over to him.

# 350 Plaintiff wishes to stop here and compare Mr. Mintz testimony at [page 48 para. 8] to statements made in

the October 10, 1992 conversation that Mr. Mintz testified to having with Mr. Damiano..


185 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

# 351 When Mr. Damiano asked Mr. Mintz "if I faxed you something You'll get it tonight" Mr. Mintz replied

"Yes."

# 352 May we compare testimony:

# 353 Statement # 43 Statement # 44 "the printing was virtually "Yes " illegible.

# 344 Statement # 45 Statement # 46 "Uh they wouldn't even show "Yes, but if it's up on the fax." another song."

# 345 Continued "So if I faxed you something, you'll get it tonight?"

# 346 Statement # 47 Statement # 48 "as a result of the disappearing "Yes, but if it's fax ink process" another

song."

#347 The testimony of Mr. Mintz in this litigation is shameful. It is a pity that a man can in a court of law just

make up whatever answer he would like for the jury to believe..

# 348 Statement # 49 Statement # 50 "When the faxes originally "Yes but if its another song" came through my

machine they were virtually illegible"

# 349 Mr. Mintz's testimony is the epitome of dishonesty and disgrace. Mr. Mintz the extent of his disregard for

the truth, for the court, for the intelligence of the court. Not to mention that all the words and statements

compared have been Elliot Mintz's own words testified to under oath in a sworn deposition.

# 350 It is evident that Mr. Mintz could not keep his lies straight. Mr. Mintz's deposition is a perfect example of

the expression one lie leads to another.

# 351 May it be known that one and a half years later in a recorded phone conversation between Mr. Mintz and

Mr. Damiano, Mr. Mintz encouraged Mr. Damiano to write a letter to Bob Dylan: Mr. Mintz states:

# 352 Mr. Damiano: Okay, well I'm going to fax you one of the new songs and it's one of the best I've ever written.

# 353 Elliot Mintz: But James, didn't you hear what I just said?

# 354 Mr. Damiano: Okay then I won't send it.

# 355 Elliot Mintz: "This is my problem. I'm not allowed to. Legally I can't do anything with this written material.

The only thing you can do is you can write a letter to Bob through CBS, and in that letter you can say to him, do

you wish to receive any of my written material, any of my songs.

# 356 May we now take time to think about this statement made to James Damiano by Mr. Mintz "you can write a

letter to Bob"

# 357 Mr. Mintz goes on: You can write a letter to Bob through CBS, and in that letter you can say to him. Do

you wish to receive any of my written material any of my songs. Then if you should receive a letter from him,

signed by him where he says yes I definitely want to receive the material , please send it to me, with his signature

on it or a lawyer signing for him or something like that, then that is fine. Then he's asked for the stuff. If you hear

nothing back from him or any legal representative then you have to conclude that he would rather write his own

."

# 358 NOTE: Please note that the date that this statement was made by Mr. Mintz was October 10, 1992 after

Mr. Mintz correspondence with Mr. Damiano for over two years and eleven months since as per Mr. Mintz's

testimony [November of 1989][emph. added]. After Mr. Mintz received Mr. Damiano's materials he wanted Mr.


186 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Damiano to write a letter to Bob Dylan. Must we go through every sentence of this statement and compare it to

Mr. Mintz's testimony.

# 359 Let's just compare one of the statements:

# 360 Statement # 51 Statement # 52 "But if you have some kind of "You can write a letter of legal problem with

CBS, then to Bob, through CBS get the attorney's to contact and in that letter you can these people at CBS." say

to him. Do you wish to receive any of my material any of my songs"

# 361 Statement # 53 Statement # 54 "It is my opinion that Mr. "You can write a letter Damiano was at the time

of to Bob, through CBS, these conversation delusional." and in that letter you can say to him, "Do you wish to

receive any of material, any of my songs."

# 362 Need Plaintiff say more: Mr. Mintz must be stopped. This blatant lying cannot go on any longer. It is by

Mr. Mint's own testimony that he perjures himself to the court. Mr. Mintz must be impeached in regard to his

credibility.

The conversation continued: Mr. Mint'z testified that he read the transcript of this recorded telephone

conversation and that he did not take exception to it. Also sating that the date affixed during discovery the

conversation seemed "accurate" to him.

# 363 Mr. Damiano: Okay are you going to send me my songs back that I faxed to you?

# 365 Elliot Mintz: Uh, they wouldn't even show up on the fax cause the quality of the faxes came through to me.

In other words they didn't print out that well. They'll just be kept in a safe place.

# 366 Mr. Damiano: You will keep them in a safe place?


# 368 Mr. Damiano: Well thank you Mitch.

# 369 Elliot Mintz: I wish you well.

# 370 May we back track to compare two statements Mr. Mintz testified to:

# 371 Statement # 55 Statement # 56 "Under the subject of mistruths "It is my opinion that Mr. spoken to your

client, during Damiano was at the time these conversations, he would of these conversations frequently ask me to

pass along delusional." information, ask questions about Bob or to Bob about him. I in fact told him that I would

and that I did.

# 372 Statement # 57 Statement # 58 "They will just be kept in a "It is my opinion that safe place" Mr. Damiano

was at the time of these conversations delusional."

# 373 Comparing further the testimony of Mr. Mintz :

# 374 By Steven Kramer: Going further down, sir. About midway, you say - - Let's just put this in context. James

Damiano says, "You do remember about a year ago when I was at work, about a year and a half ago, when I was

at work and I asked you if you knew of anything, remember, you said Bob Dylan had the songs in his suitcase and

that he was going to read them." The transcript states you said, "No I never said that." Then James Damiano says,

"You don't remember saying that?" Then you say, "No, I did not say that."

# 375 Once again Statement two reflects Mr. Mintz's reply to the question did you say to Mr. Damiano that Bob


187 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Dylan had Mr. Damiano's songs in his suitcase and that he was going to read them. Please compare:

# 376 Statement # 59 Statement # 60 Under the subject of mistruths "In my opinion Mr. Damiano was spoken to

your client during at the time of these telephone these conversations, he would conversations, delusional"

frequently ask me to pass along information, ask questions about Bob, or to Bob about him. I in fact told him that

I would and that I did.

# 377 Although the question was never asked, let us now ask what information did Mr. Mintz pass along to Bob

Dylan concerning Mr. Damiano? Perhaps even more controversial is Mr. Mintz's testimony below:...[page 33

para. 7]

# 378 Statement # 61 Statement # 62 "Under the subject of mistruths "Many times, not many times spoken to

your client during but on those occasions, when these conversations, he would he would ask me to pass on

frequently ask me to pass along something to Mr. Dylan, I may information, ask questions have said to him, "I will

try to about Bob, or to Bob about pass it along," or words to that him. I in fact told him that I effect. [page 33

para. 7] would and that I did.

# 379 May we compare the key phrase

# 380 Statement # 63 Statement # 64 "I in fact told him" "I may have told him" # 381 Blatant conflict between

testimony only:

# 382 Statement # 64 Statement # 65 "That I would and "I will try to pass it that I did" along"

# 383 Steven Kramer: Do you recall ever calling Mr. Damiano?

# 384 Elliot Mintz: I honestly can't recall.

# 385 [page 148 par.9] By Orin Snyder: He also states that in a later conversation you told him "Dylan read the

songs and that he thought they were good and that he may use them." Did you say that to Mr. Damiano?

# 386 Elliot Mintz: I did not say.

# 387 Orin Snyder: To Mr. Damiano?

# 388 Elliot Mintz: I did not say that to Mr. Damiano. I would never say such a thing to Mr. Damiano or to any

other profile or suggest anything of that kind.

# 389 By Orin Snyder: Why is that?

# 390 Elliot Mintz: First of all, it is untrue, secondly, Bob Dylan does just fine. He writes and sings his own

songs."

# 400 NOTE. The date Mr. Mintz testified to making the statement "Bob Dylan does just fine, he writes and his

own songs was made May 30th, 1996.

# 401 Note: In a span of seven years from 1990 to 1997 Bob Dylan released only one newly written original song

titled "Dignity".

# 402 As of Mr. Mintz testifying to "Mr. Dylan writes and sings his own songs" It had been six years and six

months that Bob Dylan had released one newly written original song. By Steven Kramer: Would you tell the jury

what you believe is delusional in that statement, if you could just quote the words, literally quote the words.

[page 93 par. 23]


188 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Mr. Mintz.: Quoting from 0147, where he says, "They brought me back stage. Dylan walked directly toward me. I

handed him the book and he turned around and got on the bus." Then his sentence later indicates, Eleven years

with CBS. They have taken my songs for eleven years." His final sentence, "I mean what's that all about?" Well I

have problems with him. [page 94 par. 2 ]

Mr. Mintz: Okay.

By Steven Kramer: Go head.

Mr. Mintz: The following would support that hypothesis, in my mind. I am quoting, "I mean, these people

befriended me for eleven years." That is not the end of his sentence,

Mr. Mintz seemed to have forgotten the fact that he had previously admitted and eluded to other facts in his

testimony which blatantly conflict with his testimony.

Should the court need to evaluate the credibility of Mr. Mintz's testimony any further it need just ask.

May the court please note that Katheryn Baker testified that during her interview with Bob Dylan he stated to her

that he did not have enough songs that he wanted to put on an album.

From Katheryn Bakers deposition: "I went back in the transcript and that not entirely accurate what he did say

was that he didn't have enough songs that he wanted to put on an album"

Also from the Ms. Baker's deposition:

By Steven Kramer: And was anyone else present at the interview?: . Baker: Yes Elliot Mintz who was at the time

Bob Dylan's publicist.

Elliot Mintz testified to the fact that as early as the middle of 1989 he was corresponding with James Damiano

Tony Tiller testified:

Tony Tiller: Jim and I were friends. I considered Jim a very good friend.

By Steven Kramer: And after 91?

Tony Tiller: I was promoted to associate director of marketing services. Referring to a Bob Dylan concert at Jones

Beach theater in Long Island Mr. Tiller also testified:

By Steven Kramer: Let's go back to the Jones Beach concert if we may to the time when you offered the tickets to

Mr. Damiano before the concert actually took place ok?

Mr. Tiller Uhm hum.

By Steven Kramer: During that point in time, when you offered the tickets to him and before he actually went to

the concert, did you ever say to him or suggest to him that maybe he should bring some of his songs with him.

By Mr. Tiller; No I did not.

By Steven Kramer: Any, do you deny saying that or is it that you just don't recall one way or the other?

By Mr. Tiller: I deny suggesting to Jim that he bring songs along with him. I did however concur with him when


189 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

he asked me do you think I should bring my songs with me, I said sure why not what could it hurt.



JAMES DAMIANO

Plaintiff

CV (95-4795-(JBS)

-against-

SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC

and BOB DYLAN

Defendants

PLAINTIFF'S APPEAL-OF JUDGE JEROME B. SIMANDLE'S MEMORANDUM OPINION OF FINDING

JAMES DAMIANO IN CONTEMPT FOR VIOLATING JUDGE JOEL B. ROSENS CONFIDENTIALITY

ORDER AND MOTION TO VACATE SAID ORDER..

Dated November 28, 1999

1. Defendants obtained a protective order designating all discovery materials as confidential granted by Judge Joel

B. Rosen based on the allegation that For several years preceding this lawsuit, Mr. Damiano sought to

commercially exploit his merit less allegations against Bob Dylan.

a. Plaintiff contests both statements "commercially exploit" and "Merit less allegations"

2. Orin Snyder's certification in support of defendants' motion to hold James Damiano in contempt for violations

of said protective order begins with the title language "Damiano's Pre-Litigation Attempts to Profit From His

fraudulent Allegations."

3. This is the same language that defendants used to obtained said protective order.

( A true and correct copy of the pages containing this language is attached here to see Exhibit A)

4. Plaintiff contests the statement "fraudulent allegation" made in this statement and draws the attention of the

court to a letter sent to James Damiano dated May 7, 1996 from the Library of congress containing the exact

language quoted herin :

"Dear Mr. Damiano: This is in response to your expedited request received in our office on March 26, 1996 via

Steven M. Kramer office for certified copies of the deposits PAU-103-561 and 3 others.

A search conducted at the Copyright Offices Deposit Copy Storage Area disclosed that the deposit entitled

Collective Songs By James Damiano registered under the number PAU 409-107 is in the progress of being

transferred to the Washington National Record Center.

At this time we are unable to provide you with a copy of that deposit. You may resubmit your request at a later

date and we will conduct another search for no additional search fee. (A true and correct copy of the May 7,

1996 letter sent to Mr. Damiano from the copyright office is attached hereto as Exhibit B)

5. Exhibit B is dated May 7, 1996 however defendants were able to obtain months before Damiano received said

letter from the copyright office.


190 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

6. Page 206 of the James Damiano deposition displays E X H I B I T S FOR IDENTIFICATION # 42 marked as

Mr. Damiano's certified 1982 copyright filing number PAU 409-107. This page factually documents that

defendants had in their possession plaintiff's copyright filing on May 16, 1996 whereas nine days before the

copyright office informed Mr. Damiano that it was unable to locate Plaintiff's copyright filing and that he may

resubmit his request for certified copies of the filing at a later date preferably 180 days later. (A true and correct

copy of the Page 206 of the James Damiano deposition is attached hereto as Exhibit C)

7. Again plaintiff draws the attention of the court to page 116 para 20 through page 117 para 15 of the Damiano

deposition.]

By Orin Snyder: Let me have the court reporter now mark, please, three documents for identification.

First will be Mr. Damiano's certified 1988 copyright filing number TXU 547786 bearing plaintiff's Bates stamp

L-003 through and including L 0073. Can we mark that as the next exhibit (Whereupon, Mr. Damiano's certified

filing number TXU 547786 marked defendants' Exhibit 41 for identification as of this date.)

By Orin Snyder : Next will be Mr. Damiano's certified 1982 copyright filing again certified with the number PAU

409-107 marked defendants' Exhibit 42 for identification as of this date.

pages 116 through 117 of the James Damiano deposition further documents that defendants were able to obtain

access to plaintiffs 1982 copyright filing months before plaintiff was able to obtain access.(A true and correct

copy of page 116 para 20 through page 117 para 15 of the Damiano deposition is attached hereto as Exhibit D)

8. Defendants cannot deny this fact issue certifies a deficiency in the credibility of the copyright office.

9. May this court also take into consideration other scenarios that might come into play. During the James

Damiano deposition plaintiff was caught dumbfounded when it appeared that song lyrics were missing from his

copyright filing of materials deposited for registration to the Copyright office. How is it that the defendants were

able to obtain access to plaintiff's 1982 copyright filing from the copyright office before plaintiff himself was able

to obtain access to his own registration? This fact issue exhibited in Exhibit's B, C and D offers an explanation to

the court.

10. PLAINTIFF CAN ALSO SUPPLY THE COURT WITH OTHER DOCUMENTATION CONCERNING

DEFENDANTS ACCESS TO PLAINTIFF'S COPYRIGHTS BEFORE PLAINTIFF WAS ABLE TO GAIN

ACCESS.

10A. How is it that the copyright office supplied defendants with a certified copy of James Damiano's 1982

copyright filing on or before May 16th 1996 yet were unable to supply plaintiff with a copy until months later?

11. Plaintiff respectfully demands that Judge Simandle acknowledge with consideration, Exhibit's B, C and D in

contention to defendants groveled description of plaintiff's allegations as being fraudulent and declare if not at

least as neutrally as possible the fact that human error exists and that plaintiff's materials deposited to the

copyright office could have been misplaced or lost either purposely or unintentionally.

12. Defendants highlight their own guilt by way of motion to the court to hold Damiano in contempt for allegedly

violating Judge Joel B. Rosenï¿½s order designating all discovery materials as confidential.

13. Plaintiff denies and contests Orin Snyder's allegation that James Damiano sought to commercially exploit his

merit less allegations against Bob Dylan.

14. No factual unbiased evidence or testimony exists supporting Mr. Snyder's allegations of Mr. Damiano's

alleged exploitation of Mr. Damiano's allegations against Bob Dylan, other than Mr. Snyder's own opinion of Mr.


191 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Damiano's correspondence to certain entities in which the defendants purport to identify as exploitation.

It is unconstitutional for this court to accept as truth, the biased opinion of the opposing parties attorney when no

unbiased facts exist, to support defendants statement regarding the alleged exploitation of Mr. Damiano's claims

against Mr. Dylan.

15. Secondly it was someone other than Mr. Damiano who initially suggested that these entities be contacted for

the purpose of searching for an attorney in assuming that these entities employed the best attorneys in the

respective areas of entertainment, copyright and intellectual property law.

From the Certification of Orin Snyder

"For several years preceding this lawsuit, Damiano sought to commercially exploit his merit less allegations

against Bob Dylan. Damiano completed an unpublished manuscript totaling over 100 pages entitled "Eleven

Years," which purport to document his now-discredited allegations of copyright infringement. After writing the

manuscript, Damiano sought to market it to various publishers. In addition, Damiano sent copies to, inter alias,

the television tabloid show a "A Current Affair", and The "New Yorker magazine. Damiano also placed an

advertisement for his defamatory claims in Rolling Stone magazine, a leading music industry publication, which

read "WOULD BOB DYLAN STEAL SONGS?' Read 'Eleven Years' w/recorded phone Calls. $15.95, Virtue

Books."

16. No unbiased fact issue exists that Mr. Damiano sought to market the manuscript "Eleven Years" to various

publishers.

17. The above certified statement of Orin Snyder highlights defendantï¿½s own guilt by way of motion to the

court to hold James Damiano in contempt for allegedly violating Judge Joel B. Rosenï¿½s order designating all

discovery materials as confidential. Defendants never officially or unofficially refuted, contested or denied any of

the issues of fact concerning their solicitation of James Damiano's songs, plaintiff's eleven year association with

CBS Records and his affiliation with Dylan associates, in which they contend Mr. Damiano allegedly sought to

exploit.

18. Without a denial from defendants, of plaintiffï¿½s allegations concerning their solicitation of James Damiano's

songs, this court must consider Mr. Damiano's denial of defendantï¿½s allegations of plaintiff's alleged

exploitation of his allegations against Bob Dylan as valid by fact. This fact must be acknowledged by the court

and the court must realize that any and all alleged allegations of exploitation of Plaintiff's claims against Mr.

Dylan are the mere opinion of Orin Snyder alone of which must be considered, as biased in nature and void by

fact.

19. Again plaintiff denies the allegation that he sought to commercially exploit his allegations against Bob Dylan

and that plaintiff's motive in contacting "A Current Affair", "The New Yorker" magazine and "Rolling Stone

magazine was to find an entertainment attorney capable of competing against the caliber of attorney's that Bob

Dylan and Sony Music Entertainment could monetarily afford.

20. Plaintiff's motive was also to officially and chronologically document through a published document,

defendants solicitation of plaintiff's materials by defendants. Both plaintiff's manuscript and website have now

been officially published.

21. No court can deny that the publishing of a document in itself has a value of truth especially if it is not

contested by anyone. This value of truth has carried a tremendous amount of weight in standing up for my rights

against the enormous giant Sony Music Entertainment, Bob Dylan and all of their resources.

22. Through the absence of a denial of these allegations by defendants and through the publishing of plaintiff's

manuscript "Eleven Years", I'm sure your Honor can see that plaintiff's motive was to chronologically document


192 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

his eleven year affiliation with John Hammond, John Hammond associates, CBS Records, Bob Dylan and also

defendants solicitation of Plaintiff's songs.

23. James Damiano, in his manuscript "Eleven Years" and in Plaintiff's website "Eleven Years" (designated as

Exhibit E ) merely stated the factual truth. The law provides as a matter of law that the truth cannot be libelous.

Therefore the truth cannot be exploited.

24. Defendant's also do not specify exactly what statement Mr. Damiano published in which they contend is

either factually incorrect, damaging to Bob Dylan, or an exploitation of merit less or fraudulent claims against

Bob Dylan.

25. It is possible to be found guilty in a court of law when the specific crime was never cited to the court? What

defendants are stating to Your Honor is Damiano is guilty but we'd rather not tell you what he is guilty of. What

defendants are stating is to just find Damiano guilty. But keep off the record exactly what it is he is guilty of.

26. Defendants only contention is that James Damiano disseminated discovery materials on the internet. What

defendants do not say is that James Damiano disseminated a portion of the testimony of Bob Dylan's publicist (

Elliot Mintz ) in which Mr. Mintz testified under oath in a video taped deposition:

"Many times not many times but on those occasions when he would ask me to pass along information to Bob, I

may have told him I'll try and pass it along or words to that effect"

27. Or that Mr. Damiano disseminated a portion of Elliot Mintz's testimony in which Mr. Mintz testified under

oath in a video taped deposition:

Under the subject of mistruths spoken to your client during the course of these telephone conversations he would

frequently ask me to pass along information, ask questions about Bob or to Bob about him and I in fact told him

that I would and that I did and on those occasions that of course was a mistruth"

28. Mr. Mintz's testimony is in blatant conflict with his previous testimony as displayed below:

"In my opinion Mr. Damiano was at the time of these conversations delusional"

29. In other words Mr. Mintz testified that he told Mr. Damiano that he was giving Mr. Damiano's songs to Bob

Dylan yet he accused Mr. Damiano of being delusional. Plaintiff invites any person in the legal world from

Kenneth Star to Laurence Tribe to compare this testimony and refute the fact that this testimony is not conflictive

and blatantly adverse.

30. Does the court chose to refuse to see the irony of Mr. Mintz's testimony?

31. Defendants Sony Music Entertainment and Bob Dylan do not contend that Plaintiff James Damiano is not

telling the truth about the issues of fact published in his manuscript "Eleven Years" (Exhibit # 5) nor do

defendants contend that Mr. Damiano is not telling the truth about issues of fact published on his website

concerning their solicitation of his songs, the eleven years history of Damiano's affiliation with CBS Records and

Bob Dylan through Mikie Harris, Tony Tiller, Elliot Mintz, Jeffrey Rosen, Mike Reed, Tom Masters, Richard

Fernandez, and John Hammond Sr. office.

32. Plaintiff's motive was also to officially document through a published document, defendants solicitation of

plaintiff's materials by defendants. Both plaintiff's manuscript and website have now been officially published.

33. Solicitation implies copying and copying implies infringement.

34. The court must acknowledge and rule in light of the following evidence and that the truth cannot be libelous:


193 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

35. That the publishing of this truthful information cannot be libelous and that the truth cannot be exploited.

36. That plaintiff has the right to publish this information under the first amendment of the Constitution of the

United States.

Passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791.

AMENDMENT I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or

abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition

the Government for a redress of grievances.

37. The court must acknowledge and rule in light of the absence of a denial by defendants of plaintiff's allegations

of defendantï¿½s solicitation of plaintiff James Damiano's songs.

38. The court must acknowledge that any denial by defendants could have been made to the court more than four

years ago when the suit was filed.

39. To reiterate defendants guilt even further defendants never contested any of the issues or facts set forth in

Plaintiff's manuscript "Eleven Years" even after defendants were made aware of the following advertisement

which was published in Rolling Stone magazine that read "WOULD BOB DYLAN STEAL SONGS?' Read

'Eleven Years' w/recorded phone Calls. $15.95, Virtue Books."

40. Defendants do not contend that plaintiff is not telling the truth about the fact issues published in his website

alleging that they made promises to the plaintiff concerning his songwriting career.

41. In fact Defendants do not contend that plaintiff James Damiano is not telling the truth about any of the

information published on his website therefore the information contained in plaintiff's website cannot be libelous.

In fact Defendants do not contend that plaintiff James Damiano is not telling the truth when he published the fact

that in a span of seven years from 1990 to 1997 Bob Dylan only released one newly written original song titled

"Dignity" in which he claimed to have independently written. All other songs released on Bob Dylan albums

during those years were songs taken from songs in the public domain, traditional folk songs and previously

written and released Bob Dylan songs. Should the court lay out all seven albums on a table and review the credits

it will reveal that the albums were produced or arranged by Bob Dylan (Not written by Bob Dylan). I believe the

albums display just the title of the songs and do not display the name of the original author of the songs. It would

also be interesting to know whether Dylan played royalties to any of the families of the original authors of these

songs. Nevertheless Defendants do not contest said statement published on Mr. Damiano's website.

42. Again the truth cannot be libelous therefore the truth cannot be exploited.

43. Without a denial from defendants of the allegations published on plaintiff's website, defendants admit to their

own guilt by contending that the issues of fact cited on Plaintiffs' website are damaging to Bob Dylan. Here,

clearly the defendants admit to the court themselves that the issues of fact they refuse to contest and refuse to

deny are damaging to Bob Dylan. Apparently admitting that plaintiff's allegations are meritous. Again the truth

cannot be libelous.

44. The absence of a denial by defendants is evidence enough to vacate Judge Joel B. Rosen's confidentiality

order designating all discovery materials as confidential and to also reverse Judge Simandle's decision of finding

James Damiano guilty of contempt for violations of that order.


194 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

45. Not many songwriters can honestly say that their material was solicited by Bob Dylan and or CBS Records.

This fact alone is of public interest.

Defendants manipulated Judge Joel B. Rosen to grant said protective order based on the biased testimony of the

following biased witness's both of whom have submitted materials and projects to Sony Corporation with hopes

of gaining Sony's services such, as distribution and promotion. Both of whom could monetarily benefit from a

contract with Sony Corporation.

Scott Patterson: I draw the attention of the court to the following testimony of Scott Patterson's deposition which

reveals that Mr. Patterson's testimony was biased: And that at the time of Mr. Patterson's depositions, he was

awaiting a response from Sony concerning the submission of a musical projected that Mr. Patterson's company

had submitted to Sony Music.


23 operator. We are back on the record. The

24 time is 2:40 p.m.

25 BY MR. KRAMER:

144

1 Patterson

2 Q. Scott, could you give the jury an

3 idea of how many bands you manage and are involved

4 with on a professional basis?

5 A. At the present time, about 20.

6 Q. And just an estimate of how many

7 record companies you are involved with on a

8 professional basis, either in terms of getting

9 deals for your bands or in the process of getting

10 deals for bands?

11 A. Basically all the major labels and

12 some independents. So it would be, I guess five

13 major labels, various people throughout the

14 companies.

15 Q. And who are the five major labels?


195 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

16 A. It would be Sony, the divisions of

17 that, Columbia and Epic. A&M Elektra, Mercury,

18 Polygram. Some of the independents we have Xemu

19 Records, Cleveland City, SBI, Curb Records, it is

20 a country label.

Further, defendants contend in the Orin Snyder certification that "Damiano subsequently entered into a written

agreement with an individual named Nicholas Kuntz regarding the commercial exploitation of his claims". The

agreement provided as follows:

This is to certify that on this day January 28th, 1994 that James Damiano assigns the monetary [sic] settlement of

any legal issues awarded to James Damiano regarding his legal suits [sic] involving CBS Records and / or Bob

Dylan to both Nicholas G. Kuntz and James Damiano cooperatively and any and all profits derived [sic] from the

sale or production of this material adapted to the mediums of publishing, recording, video, television or film are

to be shared and distributed equally.

The sale and or development of any project based upon the property "Eleven Years" the manuscript written by

James Damiano documenting this matter, for the mediums of publishing, recording, video, television or film shall

be developed, produced and distributed through the mutual efforts of this alliance between the consenting parties

and no other rights regarding the property "Eleven Years" for the purposes of publishing, recording, video,

television or film development, production or distribution may be assigned or acted upon without the express

written consent of both parties.

Defendants fail to mention Mr. Kuntz has rescinded this contract. Also in a letter to James Damiano Mr. Kuntz

writes:

" I understand that "For the record you are in need of a clarification from me as to the nature of the "agreement"

that I testified to in my deposition for your law suit involving Bob Dylan and yourself. I would like to add that I

am offering this information willingly and that the agreement we had has been voided, as I have previously

submitted in writing, and that there exists no further "agreement" between us.

Mr. Kuntz acknowledges that at the time this alleged, invalid agreement was signed plaintiff James Damiano was

under not only duress but under a great deal of duress as follows.

At the time that this agreement was drawn up between us, there was a great deal of stress and tension personally

in both out lives., as you well know. You were at a time in your life that had a great deal of confusion and turmoil

involving almost every aspect of your life - Your relationship with your parents, your marriage as well as the

severed relationship with your son, who meant a great deal to you. As if those things were not enough, you were

also facing a tremendous number of questions and issues regarding the situation with your prior dealings with Bob

Dylan, his associates and Sony Music.

I, on the other hand, was also facing numerous professional and personal issues that were also demanding.

Together we puzzled daily as to how to manage your situation so that a more positive handling of those issues

could be arranged. It was not always possible to make the best decision as to what should be done at any given

time.

Mr. Kuntz goes on to explain the intentions of his actions and his goal involving correspondence written in James

Damiano's behalf which was to find an attorney.


196 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

One thing is and was always clear regarding the matter involving Bob Dylan and Sony Music. That was that you

needed a lawyer to assist you in bringing this matter forward in the manner necessary. That was always our goal,

right from the beginning. In our respective personal positions, however that was easier said than done and

required a considerable effort over many months.

That night that you called me, around 11pm, I believe you had been out with your Dad and your anticipation

before that evening was high that this would be a positive meeting with him apparently it was not, because you

called from a diner in Toms River and he had left you there with no way to get back to my office in Wall

Township where you had been staying at the time.

It became apparent to me, after you called asking if I would come to get you, that my commitment, if I was going

to proceed to help you any further that I already had, was going to be the primary source of support for you. That

would mean more time that would have to be devoted, money that would have to be spent to carry out whatever

needed to be done - i.e. trips to New York City - and other resources or expenses that would have to go for things

like printing, phone calls, and other incidentals such as Fed-Ex charges.

I was working at the time with extremely limited funds, trying to support a family and working desperately to keep

a failing business alive. So, I made a decision and that was that if I was going to be devoting all of this to your

effort, I wanted to be assured that I would have a say in what was going to be the path and circumstances we

would be facing. I decided that I wanted to have an official and signed agreement with you, more for the sake of

your realizing that I was making this decision and what this commitment on my behalf might mean.

We had never talked about this kind of a thing prior to that evening, however, I wanted you to realize that I was

making a much bigger commitment than just helping a friend out who needed a hand. In short, I was now about to

devote almost all of my efforts and attention to helping you get a lawyer and that I was going to do my best to not

have any further distractions to that goal.

So, I hastily wrote up the agreement and brought it with me to pick you up from the diner. I walked in and you

were very distraught. You had just been left there by your father and that was because you had another

problematic confrontation with him.

I told you that from here on in that if I was going to have to be your support, in every sense of the word, that I

wanted to know that we were not going to make any mistakes. To insure that, we were going to be "partners" in

the sense that we discussed and agreed upon future courses of action. I then presented you with the agreement.

Mr. Kuntz reiterates the amount of duress plaintiff James Damiano was under the night the agreement was signed

by Mr. Damiano. I would like to draw the courts attention to the following statement made to James Damiano by

Nicholas Kuntz the night the agreement was signed. Mr. Kuntz stated to Mr. Damiano in a rural diner at 12:30 in

the morning quoting Mr. Kuntz himself "Well, if you're not going to agree and sign it, I will leave you here!"

Mr. Kuntz continues: You had just had a very trying evening, one of many at that time, and said that you couldn't

think of anything like that at the time. I told you, "Well, if you're not going to agree and sign it, I was going to

leave you here!" That took you by surprise, which it was intended to do and you thought for a moment. Then you

said something like "Oh, what the hell," picked up the pen and signed it. Then it was over. We never talked about

it again, we didn't need to. That's why it was such a surprise that I even mentioned it in the deposition. Due to the

nature of the questioning at the deposition, I couldn't not mention it and not be truthful. It probably would have

been easier if I hadnï¿½t brought it out, however, I knew that the truth of how it came about and why, would be

important, regardless of how the defense would perceive it and try to use it to their advantage, which they

obviously have.

I think it's obvious, though, that our only intent was to make sure that you got a lawyer to help bring your case

forward, because that's all we did. That's all we ever worked on, that's all we ever planned. My intent in even

creating that agreement was so that, in effect, you would have no other choice but to consult me on major issues


197 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

so that I could help you not make a mistake. At the time it was important, however, after that night we literally

forgot about it.

I would have no problem testifying to this statement.

Sincerely Nicholas G. Kuntz.

I would like to direct the courts attention to the specific sentence in Mr. Kuntz's letter which states:

"Well, if you're not going to agree and sign it, I was going to leave you here!"

Clearly no court would decide that this is or ever was a valid binding agreement, especially since Mr. Kuntz

specifically acknowledged even other duress that James Damiano had been under at the signing of this document.

The order for confidentiality granted by Judge Joel. B. Rosen was based on the incompleted and misrepresented

testimony of Nicholas G. Kuntz.

This is war

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT...................................................................................... 1

ARGUMENT .............................................................................. 2

A. JUDGE SIMANDLE FAILED TO ACKNOWLEDGE BLATANT ADMISSIONS OF GUILT BY THE

DEFENDANTS.

B. AFTER A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE WHICH INCIMINATED THE DEFENDANTS WAS

PRODUCED TO THE COURT, IN WHICH THE COURT FAILED TO ACKNOWLEDGE, PLAINTIFF FELT

DEFEATED BEFORE THE HEARING EVER STARTED WHICH TAINTED HIS UNSWORN TESTIMONY.

C. DEFENDANTS HAD IN THEIR POSSESSION PLAINTIFFS MATERIALS FOR ELEVEN YEARS FROM

WHICH THE INSTANT LAW SUIT DERIVES.

D. PLAINTIFF'S MATERIALS WERE SOLICTED BY DEFENDANTS FOR OVER A PERIOD OF ELEVEN

YEARS.

E. PLAINTIFF WAS TOLD BY HIS ATTORNEY ROBERT CHURCH THAT JUDGE ROSEN'S

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER WAS BROADLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

F. DEFENDANTS HAVE LEFT ALL ISSUES OF THEIR SOLICITATION OF PLAINTIFF'S MATERIALS

UNCONTESTED FOR TWO YEARS AND TWO MONTHS AFTER PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS WERE

PUBLISHED ON THE WORLD WIDE INTERNET.

G. TO THIS DAY DEFENDANTS HAVE NOT CONTESTED THE ISSUES JAMES DAMIANO'S SONGS.

H. COPY IMPLIES MOTIVE TO INFRINGE

I. PLAINTIFF MOVES THE COURT TO RULE IN LIGHT OF THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE

J. PLAINTIFF'S FIRST MOTIVE TO PUBLISH INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET WAS TO PROVE TO


198 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

THE COURT THAT DEFENDANTS WOULD NOT CONTEST THE ISSUES OF SOLICITAITON OF

PLAITIFF'S INTELECTUAL PROPERTY IN WHICH THEY STILL HAVE NOT DONE. THIS IS GROUNDS

ENOUGH FOR LIFTING SAID PROTECTIVE ORDER

K. PLAINTIFF'S SECOND MOTIVE WAS TO FIND AN ATTORNEY TO REPLACE STEVEN M. KRAMER

AFTER HIS SUSPENSION

L. PLAINTIFFS THIRD MOTIVE WAS TO HAVE DEFENDANTS DOWNLOAD THE WEBSITE AND

PRODUCE IT TO THE COURT. AS EVIDENCE OF THEIR OWN GUILT.

M. TO PRODUCE TO THE COURT ALL EVIDENCE IN WHICH STEVEN M. KRAMER REFUSED TO

PRODUCE TO THE COURT.

N. TO HAVE THE WEBSITE DOCKETED AND PUT ON RECORD.

O. TO ENLIGHTEN THE COURT TO EXISTING ISSUES OF FACT

P. TO ENLIGHTEN THE COURT TO EVEN OTHER UNRSESOLVED ISSUES OF FACT.

Q. TO EXPOSE TO THE COURT STEVEN M. KRAMER'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT HE

REPRESENTED WMOT RECORDS , AN AFFILIATE OF CBS RECORDS.

R. PLAINTIFF HAS ACOMPLISHED WHAT HE FELT NEEDED TO BE ACOMPLISHED BY PUBLISHING

INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET TO PROVE TO THE COURT THAT DEFENDANTS WOULD NOT

CONTEST THE MASSIVE ISSUES OF SOLICIATION OF HIS MATERIALS & PLAINTFF DELETED HIS

WEBSITE UNDER DURESS FROM THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

S. PLAINTIFFJAMES DAMIANO MOVES THE COURT TO VACATE THE CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

FOR ALL THE REASONS CONTAINED HEREIN.

T. PLAINTIFF AGREES TO NOT SELL ANY INFORMATION WHICH WAS PROTECTED UNDER JUDGE

ROSENS CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

U PLAINTIFF JAMES DAMIANO HAS A RIGHT TO TELL HIS STORY UNDER THE THE UNITED STATES

OF AMERICA.

V. PLAINTIFF'S FORMER ATTORNEY WHO REPRESENTED HIM IN THE INSTANT CASE WAS

DISBARED WHICH PREJUDICED PLAINTIFF AND CAUSED A GREAT DEAL OF CONFUSION.

Argument

1. THE TRUTH CANNOT BE LIBELOUS OR EXPLOITED

1A. The court must acknowledge and rule in light of the following evidence:

1B. That defendants Sony Music Entertainment and Bob Dylan do not contend that Plaintiff James Damiano is

not telling the truth about the issues of fact published on his website concerning their solicitation of his songs, the

eleven years history of his association with CBS / Sony Music and Bob Dylan's entourage and therefore the

publishing of this information cannot be libelous and plaintiff has the right to publish this information under the

first amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.

1C. The court must acknowledge and rule in light of the absence of a denial by defendants of plaintiff's

allegations of defendantï¿½s solicitation of plaintiff James Damiano's songs.


199 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

1D. Defendants do not contend that plaintiff is not telling the truth about the issues of facts published in his

website alleging that they made promises to the plaintiff concerning his songwriting career.

1E. In fact Defendants do not contend that plaintiff James Damiano is not telling the truth about any of the

information published on his website therefore the information contained in plaintiff's website cannot be libelous.

The truth cannot be libelous AND THEREFORE THE COURT SHOULD HAVE NO INTEREST IN

CONCEALING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD. OR THE HISTORY OF

DAMIANO'S ELEVEN YEAR ASSOCIATION WITH CBS , SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT AND BOB

DYLAN'S ENTOURAGE.

1F. Without a denial from defendants of the allegations published on plaintiff's website, defendants admit to their

own guilt by contending that the issues of fact cited on Plaintiffs website are damaging to Bob Dylan. Here,

clearly the defendants admit to the court themselves that the issues of fact they refuse to contest and refuse to

deny are damaging to Bob Dylan and apparently admitting that plaintiff's allegations are meritous. Again the truth

cannot be libelous. The absence of a denial is evidence enough to vacate Judge Joel B. Rosen's confidentiality

order designating all discovery materials as confidential and defendantï¿½s motion is proven to be a nullity.

1G. Without a denial from defendants this court must accept these issues of fact as truth and plaintiff has the right

to publish this information under the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.

1H. WHAT INTEREST DOES THE COURT HAVE FOR CONCEALING THE HISTORY OF FACTS OF THIS

CASE . IT IS NOT EVERYDAY THAT AN AMATUER SONGWRITER HAS HIS SONGS SOLICITED BY A

SONGWRITER OR RECO0RD COMPANY OF THE MAGNITUDE OF BOB DYLAN AND OR SONY MUSIC

ENTERTAINMENT. THIS FACT IN ITSELF IS OF PUBLIC INTEREST.

1F. No part of James Damiano's website is damaging to Bob Dylan unless of course it is not the truth, otherwise it

is the defendants here who admit by lack of contesting the issues of fact and by not contesting Plaintiff's

allegation of defendants solicitation of his music that it is indeed the truth and by which in no possible lawful way

libels or makes liable James Damiano for delivering the truth for the truth cannot be exploited and therefore

cannot be libelous.

1G. All witness's deposed in this litigation were sworn to tell the truth.

2. NEW FINDING OF FACTS

a. This motion is also based in part on new findings of fact, of which were unknown to Plaintiff until very recently

and also other new findings of fact which were unavailable to Plaintiff also until very recently. These same finding

of facts incriminate defendants counsel and plaintiffs counsel of serious ethics violations which are detrimental to

the outcome of this law suit and by which acknowledged by and upon consideration of this court conclusively

constitute reversible error and judicially defeat summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

Said new findings of fact found in 2a. are detrimental to the outcome of this law suit by which upon consideration

of this court conclusively constitute reversible error.

The opening statement of defendantï¿½s motion in response to Plaintiff's motion of reconsideration pleads to the

court "This court is familiar with the troubled history of this case?" Plaintiff objects to this statement : Although

Mr. Johnson believes that this case has been troubling, he was still paid a hundred and fifty dollars an hour for his

trouble that's given, however what may have troubled Mr. Johnson's is that defendants counsel are caught red

handed of committing ethic violations serious enough to revoke their license to practice law.

3. DEFENDANTS ARE CAUGHT RED-HANDED


200 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

With the development of the internet more and more facts come to light everyday. Plaintiff has discovered new

facts concerning key persons and key witnesses in this litigation that were simply unavailable before.

Defendants are caught red-handed committing ethical violations whereby the following evidence upon

consideration of this court shall be deemed conclusive. Said new findings of fact set forth in 3a are detrimental to

the outcome of this law suit by which acknowledged and upon consideration of this court conclusively constitute

reversible error.

Although Mr. Johnson does not state exactly what "troubling history" he is referring to, Plaintiff can only guess

that it may have something to do with the fact that the Plaintiff's former counsel Steven M. Kramer had a conflict

with the parties in this litigation.

It has come to the attention of the Plaintiff that Plaintiff's former attorney Steven M. Kramer ( now suspended

from the practice of law and disbarred in New York, Pennsylvania and other states ) was an associate of and an

attorney for the Defendants prior to his agreement to represent the Plaintiff. Mr. Kramer took numerous

depositions in this litigation. Plaintiff contends that Mr. Kramer refused to ask enough pertinent questions to

these witness's. It appears as almost evident and intentional that in some instances and on the most pertinent

questions Kramer dropped his line of questioning and in other instances suggested to the witness "Or is it that you

just don't recall" thus protecting the defendant's witness's. These unethical, and extenuating circumstances upon

consideration of this court conclusively constitute reversible error and it's existence defeats summary judgment.

May the court that that was not all.

During the video taped depositions both Mr. Kramer and Orin Snyder (Defendant's attorney) forgot that the

microphone was on. The conversation between Mr. Snyder and Mr. Kramer documents their collusion to the

record.

I respectfully direct the courts attention to the following two articles published in The Philadelphia Daily News in

which Steven M. Kramer is mentioned in both articles.

Not only does the Steven M. Kramer conflict legally constitute reversible error, It is also criminal for this court to

ignore Steven M. Kramer's conflict. Plaintiff respectfully request that this court refer Mr. Kramer's conflict to the

proper criminal and civil authorities.

Mr. Kramer's involvement in the following cases further support Plaintiffs allegation of Mr. Kramer's fraud and

conflict See also WMOT Enterprises, et al., v. Bank Leumi Le - Israel, B.M., st al. No. 84-2065 Also see CA

84-2622 Vedatsky vs. Kramer

Steven M. Kramer also entered his appearance in the Frankie Smith vs. WMOT Records lawsuit concerning

royalties on Frankie Smiths hit song "Double Dutch Bus" case identified as NO. CA 82-1275-NS. Steven Kramer

represented WMOT Records an affiliate of CBS / Sony Music Entertainment Inc.

An attorney cannot ethically represent the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

Plaintiff identifies the following exhibit below as " MELVIN, BLUE NOTES SUE OVER CASINO DRUG BUST

" and marked as Exhibit 1.

The article read as follows:

Exhibit 13

PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS

MELVIN, BLUE NOTES SUE OVER CASINO DRUG BUST


201 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Friday, August 19, 1983

Section: LOCAL

Page: 33

By SCOTT FLANDER, Daily News Correspondent

TEXT: Singer Harold Melvin and three members of his group, the Blue Notes, arrested on drug charges at Caesars

Boardwalk Regency Hotel Casino on Aug. 7, have filed a $40-million libel suit against Caesars.

The suit, filed in Superior Court in Trenton, alleges Caesars gave the press false information about the arrests.

Melvin and the three group members were among 10 Philadelphia-area residents arrested at Caesars on drug

possession charges after police allegedly found cocaine and met amphetamine in an adjoining room.

The suit alleges Caesars falsely told the press that the group had rented the room where the cocaine was found,

making it appear the drugs belonged to the group. The lawsuit says the drugs didn't belong to any member of the

group, and the room was rented by a person with no connection to the group.

Steven Kramer, a Philadelphia lawyer representing the group, said Melvin and his musicians stayed at the Village

Motel and not Caesars during their stay in Atlantic City.

The suit seeks $10 million in damages each for Melvin, 44, and the three Blue Notes arrested: George Prettyman,

35, Cornell Grant, 25, and Rufus Thorne, 31.

A small amount of marijuana and a .32-caliber revolver were found in the room where the arrests were made,

police said. In addition to drug charges, Melvin and the others arrested were charged with conspiracy and

possession of a concealed weapon.

Plaintiff respectfully submits to this court Exhibit 2 in support of Plaintiff's assertion that Steven M. Kramer (

Plaintiff's former counsel) had a conflict in this litigation.

Exhibit 14

The following marked as exhibit 2 is titled LAUNDERING' TOOK RECORD CO. TO CLEANERS and identified

as Exhibit 2. Steven M. Kramer is mentioned in the article.

PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS

LAUNDERING' TOOK RECORD CO. TO CLEANERS

Wednesday, November 21, 1984

Section: LOCAL

Edition: 9STAR

Page: 8

By JOSEPH R. DAUGHEN, Daily News Staff Writer

TEXT: A federal bankruptcy trustee has accused officials of Bank Leumi Le-Israel of conspiring with fugitive

dentist Lawrence W. Lavin and boxing promoter Mark Stewart to loot a Philadelphia record company of more

than $2 million.

In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia Nov. 2, Jonathan H. Ganz, trustee of WMOT Enterprises

Inc., contends that Lavin and Stewart obtained an interest in the firm "by fraud," used it to "launder" profits from

Lavin's alleged drug dealings, then stripped it of its assets and threw it into bankruptcy.

Lavin and Stewart were aided in the alleged conspiracy by two officials of Bank Leumi's Philadelphia branch,

loan officer James Patterson and vice president Irving Feldman, the suit says.

Lavin, 29, was indicted by a federal grand jury on Sept. 10 and charged with being the kingpin of a 13-member


202 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

ring that allegedly sold $5 million worth of cocaine a month.

He was released the next day after posting 10 percent of $150,000 bail and has since disappeared, along with his

wife, Marcia, 28, who is six months' pregnant, and their 3-year-old son. He subsequently was indicted on Oct. 1

for allegedly evading $548,000 in income taxes.

Stewart, 42, was indicted the same day and charged with conspiring with Lavin to impede the collection of the

dentist's taxes.

Stewart, of Margate, N.J., was the boxing promoter at the former Playboy Casino Hotel and now operates a

limousine service in Atlantic City.

The trustee's lawsuit accuses Stewart, Lavin, Patterson, Feldman and Bank Leumi of engaging in "an organized

pattern of racketeering activity" and of ''unlawful diversion of WMOT's assets."

Patterson and Feldman, the suit charged, aided Stewart "to conceal their prior approval of loans" to

Stewart-owned companies that "were incapable of generating funds from legitimate sources to reduce the

outstanding indebtedness" of more than $1 million.

Donald C. Marino, Patterson's attorney, dismissed the allegations as "pure nonsense." "They don't have a single

witness to testify to any of this," said Marino.

Feldman said he left Bank Leumi 2 1/2 years ago and has no knowledge of the matter.

Edward S. Ellers, Bank Leumi's Philadelphia attorney, said the bank ''denies any wrongdoing, denies any liability

to any of the plaintiffs, and will vigorously defend its position."

Stewart could not be reached for comment. Joining trustee Ganz as plaintiffs in the suit are the new owners of

WMOT, lawyer Michael Goldberg, accountant Allen Cohen and brothers Jeffrey and Mark Salvarian.

Among the artists recording for WMOT, which has been inactive in recent years, were Fat Larry's Band, Philly

Creme, Blue Magic, Slick, Brandi Wells and Frankie Smith, whose single, "Double Dutch Bus," sold more than a

million copies.

A separate federal suit seeking $2 million in damages is pending in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia against

Bank Leumi, Stewart and Patterson by attorney Steven Kramer, who represents the former owners of WMOT,

Steve Bernstein, Alan Rubens and David Chackler.

Kramer said he is seeking permission from U.S. District Court Judge Louis Bechtle to add Lavin as a defendant.

WMOT, incorporated in 1971, developed a reputation as an aggressive independent record producer specializing

in the "Philly sound."

In June 1980, the company reached an agreement with CBS Records that would ''assure effective marketing and

distribution of WMOT's records nationwide," said the Ganz lawsuit.

WMOT obtained an $80,000 line of credit from Bank Leumi in July 1980, the suit said, and by December of that

year had drawn out all $80,000.

Although the company had "earned substantial amounts" through record sales, WMOT was at that time

experiencing cash-flow problems because of a time lag between sales and actual receipt of money, the suit stated.

The agreement with CBS specified that WMOT would not begin receiving royalties until February 1981, the suit


203 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

said, causing the company to be faced with a cash shortage from December 1980 to February 1981.

Steve Bernstein, who was then WMOT's president of operations, said in an interview that he and his partners

asked Bank Leumi to increase WMOT's line of credit by at least $25,000 to keep the company going until its

royalties came in.

In return, Bernstein said, he and his partners offered in writing to assign $116,500 in royalties to Bank Leumi and

to mortgage their homes.

The bank officials WMOT dealt with, according to the suit, were Patterson and Feldman, who also were the loan

officers in charge of Stewart's Bank Leumi accounts.

Stewart owned four companies that owed Bank Leumi a total of $1,149,291 in December 1980, when WMOT

was seeking the credit increase, the suit said. In mid-December, Patterson and Feldman rejected WMOT's request

for a credit increase, and the record company turned to Stewart for help, the suit stated.

The lawsuit said Feldman "endorsed Stewart as a good customer of the bank with substantial financial resources

and a good deal of management experience." Feldman did not disclose that Stewart owed more than $1 million to

Bank Leumi, the suit said.

Bernstein said in the interview that he and his partners entered into an agreement with Stewart on Dec. 24, 1980.

Under the agreement, Bernstein said, Stewart would set up a new company, TEC Corp., which would assume all

WMOT's debts, pay the company's operating expenses, negotiate credit terms and lines with Bank Leumi, and

provide new capital.

In return, Stewart, through TEC Corp., would receive a 60 percent ownership interest in WMOT, said Bernstein.

In January 1981, Stewart became chairman of WMOT.

Over the next nine months, according to the suit, "large sums of cash" were delivered by Lavin to Stewart, who

allegedly "laundered" the money by depositing it in WMOT's Bank Leumi account and other accounts Stewart

maintained at the bank. These funds were then transferred out to Stewart or Lavin "in a manner intended to make

tracing the funds difficult or impossible," the suit stated.

From January 1981 until March 1982, Lavin was paid $700 a week by WMOT although "he performed no

services whatsoever," the suit alleged.

Between January 1981 and May 1982, the suit stated, WMOT received more than $1 million in royalty checks,

including $841,123 from CBS. Bank Leumi permitted Stewart to use $540,000 of this to reduce the debt owed to

the bank by another Stewart company unrelated to WMOT, the suit said.

In addition, the suit said, "Leumi permitted to be improperly endorsed, negotiated and deposited to accounts

other than accounts of WMOT" CBS royalty checks totaling $288,000.

During the same period, the suit alleged, Stewart increased WMOT's debt to Bank Leumi from $80,000 to $1.3

million.

The Bank Leumi loans to WMOT were used by Stewart to pay off debts other Stewart companies owed Bank

Leumi, according to the suit.

To reiterate so there is no mistake I quote the article as follows.

"WMOT received more than $1 million in royalty checks, including $841,123 from CBS."


204 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

WMOT Records was an affiliate company of CBS / Sony Records.

Steven M. Kramer also entered his appearance in the Frankie Smith vs. WMOT Records lawsuit concerning

royalties on Frankie Smiths hit song "Double Dutch Bus" case identified as NO. CA 82-1275-NS

Plaintiffï¿½s former attorney, Steven M. Kramer also had executive orders sent directly to him from CBS

Records. (Now acquired by Sony Music.)

It is not only Plaintiff's opinion that Mr. Kramerï¿½s involvement with WMOT Records is a conflict but also the

opinion of other attorneys.

Upon consideration of the evidence contained herein it is conclusive that Plaintiff's attorney as well as defendants

counsel prejudiced plaintiff James Damiano's case by the Steven M. Kramer conflict.

Said new findings of fact set forth in Exhibit 1, and 2 are detrimental to the outcome of this law suit by which

acknowledged and upon consideration of this court conclusively constitute reversible error.

Mr. Kramer has had other ethical problems in the past. Exhibit 15

Exhibit 3, is a segment of an article downloaded from the internet about Mr. Kramer citing Mr. Kramer's 38

sanctions and his "whole repertoire of habitual misdeeds".

Plaintiff moves the court to conclusively deem as truth the existence of the Steven Kramer conflict.

Plaintiff also moves the court to deem as truth that the Steven Kramer conflict prejudiced Plaintiff's case.

At this time this court cannot deny the existence of the Steven M. Kramer conflict.

In re Steven M. Kramer, 677 N.Y.S.2d 576 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept., Sept.24, 1998). The Respondent was admitted to

practice in New Jersey in 1983 and in New York the following year. Over the past 11 years, he has been

sanctioned, criticized, or otherwise punished by various courts 38 times for professional misconduct involving

numerous clients. In 1997, New York suspended him on an interim basis. See N.O.B.C. Current Developments

Summary (Nashville, February 1998). According to the New York Court, an abbreviated survey of his long

history of official reprimands reveals a "whole repertoire of habitual misdeeds" from refusing to cease acting on

behalf of a client who fired him, flagrantly violating discovery orders, filing frivolous claims, and making false

statements to a court.

In Re: Steven M. Kramer, M.R. 14573, 98 RC 1503 (Ill., March 23, 1998). Mr. Kramer was admitted in Illinois

in 1975 and New Jersey in 1983. The Supreme Court of New Jersey suspended him for six months, and until

further order of the court, for failing to abide by his client's wishes to settle a case and for obtaining a proprietary

interest in the subject matter of his client's litigation. See N.O.B.C. Current Developments Summary (Nashville,

Feb., 1998). The Illinois Supreme Court suspended Mr. Kramer for six months and until he is reinstated in New

Jersey, as reciprocal discipline.

The facts stated within this document are detrimental to the outcome of this law suit by which upon

acknowledgement and consideration of this court conclusively constitute reversible error and judicially defeat

summary judgment in favor of the defendants

These unusual, unethical, and extenuating circumstances, issues of fact, statements of fact, admissions of guilt in

sworn statements made by the defendants, defendants continuous attempts to divert the true and incriminating

evidence from the court concerning all aspects of this litigation preclude this court from entering summary

judgment in favor of defendants Bob Dylan and Sony Music Entertainment Inc.


205 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Argument 1 is James Damiano's website "Eleven Years"

[E-mail] [email protected]

This archive is a service of Rutgers University School of Law - Camden

JAMES DAMIANO, Plaintiff, v. SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT, INC., and BOB DYLAN, Defendants.

Civil Action No. 95-4795 (JBS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

975 F. Supp. 623; 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12601

August 20, 1997, Decided

August 20, 1997, Original Filed

SUBSEQUENT HISTORY:

[**1] Reported at: 975 F. Supp. 623 at 633.

DISPOSITION:

Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration DENIED.

JUDGES:

JEROME B. SIMANDLE, United States District Judge.

OPINIONBY:

JEROME B. SIMANDLE

OPINION:

[*633]

OPINION UPON RECONSIDERATION

SIMANDLE, District Judge:

Plaintiff James Damiano filed this copyright infringement action accompanied by several federal and state claims

all arising out of the alleged theft of plaintiff's lyrics and music by Sony recording artist Bob Dylan. Presently

pending is plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of this court's December 16, 1996, [**2] Opinion and Order

granting summary judgment to defendants on all counts of plaintiff's complaint. For the reasons that follow,

plaintiff's motion will be denied..

Background

The central claim of plaintiff's complaint is that Bob Dylan infringed six separate works which plaintiff had

composed and copyrighted. (Compl. at 3-6). As discussed in this court's Opinion of December 16, 1996, five of

the purported works were actually compilations of lyrics by plaintiff which were created for the first time in the

complaint. (Op. at 2-3). The sixth piece in plaintiff's complaint was an instrumental composition referred to as

"Steel Guitars." (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration)

In opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment, rather than pursuing the five "works," plaintiff

formulated his argument to address fourteen different lyric fragments, eight of which were not even in the

complaint. The court nevertheless addressed each of the fourteen lyric claims and dismissed all of them on the

grounds that they were either non-copyrightable or had not been copyrighted prior to the lawsuit. Six lyric

fragments which were presented in plaintiff's complaint were not among the fourteen addressed by plaintiff in the

summary [**3] judgment papers and at oral argument. Those six claims were dismissed because plaintiff failed to

come forth with any evidence or argument in response to defendants' motion for summary judgment with regard to

those particular lyrics. (Op. at 6).

The court also granted summary judgment as to plaintiff's music infringement claim and his accompanying state

and federal claims. Plaintiff now asks the court to reconsider its decision with respect to the dismissal of his music

infringement claim, several of his lyric claims, and his state law claims. The court will address each argument

below.


206 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

II. Discussion

A. Standard for Reconsideration

Local Civil Rule 7.1(g) of the United States District Court, District of New Jersey, contains the standard to be

applied to motions [*634] for reconsideration. n2 L. Civ. R. 7.1(g) requires that the moving party set forth

concisely "the matters or controlling decision which counsel believes the court has overlooked." Oritani v. Sav. &

Loan Ass'n v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Md., 744 F. Supp. 1311, 1314 (D.N.J. 1990). The Rule "does not

contemplate a Court looking to matters which were not originally presented." Florham Park Chevron, Inc. v.

Chevron [**4] U.S.A., Inc. 680 F. Supp. 159, 162 (D.N.J. 1988). Rather, motions for reargument succeed only

where a "dispositive factual matter or controlling decision of law" was presented to the Court but not considered.

Pelham v. United States, 661 F. Supp. 1063, 1065 (D.N.J. 1987).

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n2 Effective April 1, 1997, General Rule 12I,

which previously governed motions for reargument, was renumbered Rule 7.1(g). The language of General Rule

12I was not altered in Rule 7.1(g).

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To succeed on a motion for reconsideration, a

party "must show more that a disagreement with the court's decision." Panna v. Firstrust Sav. Bank, 760 F. Supp.

432, 435 (D.N.J. 1991). A mere "recapitulation of the cases and argument considered by the court before

rendering its original decision fails to carry the moving party's burden." Carteret Sav. Bank, F.A. v. Shushan, 721

F. Supp. 705 709 (D.N.J. 1989).

Further, there is a strong policy against entertaining reconsideration motions based on evidence that was readily

available at the time that [**5] the original motion was heard; and so the court may, in its discretion, refuse to

consider such evidence. Florham Park Chevron, 680 F. Supp. at 162-63. "Because reconsideration of a judgment

after its entry is an extraordinary remedy, requests pursuant to these rules are to be granted 'sparingly.'" NL

Industries, Inc. v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., 935 F. Supp. 513, 516 (D.N.J. 1996) (citing Maldonado v. Lucca,

636 F. Supp. 621, 630 (D.N.J. 1986).

B. Plaintiff's Music Infringement Claim

Plaintiff alleged in his complaint that his instrumental composition, "Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on

James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration) was infringed by Dylan's song "Dignity." As discussed in the court's

Opinion, there are actually two different versions of the song plaintiff calls "Steel Guitars." (Op. at 13-14). The

first, which was produced during discovery and was marked as Exhibit 71 of defendants' moving papers, was

analyzed by both parties' experts and compared to "Dignity."

Defendants argued in their motion papers and at oral argument that the Exhibit 71 version had never been

registered with the Copyright Office. For that reason, the court dismissed plaintiff's musical infringement claim

with respect to the Exhibit 71 version [**6] of "Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's

1982 copyright registration) because plaintiff failed to meet the prima facie element of proving ownership of a

valid copyright. See Whelan Assoc. v. Jaslow Dental Lab., Inc., 797 F.2d 1222, 1231 (3d Cir. 1986); Universal

Athletic Sales Co. v. Salkeld, 511 F.2d 904, 907 (3d Cir. 1975); Jarvis v. A & M Records, 827 F. Supp. 282, 288

(D.N.J. 1993).

The second version of "Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright

registration) was registered with the Copyright Office in 1988, and although it was not originally identified by

plaintiff as an infringed work, the court analyzed the copyrighted version and found that there was no substantial

similarity between it and "Dignity." Therefore, summary judgment was granted on plaintiff's musical infringement

claim as plaintiff had failed to establish a prima facie case of infringement.

Plaintiff now argues that the court erred in failing to consider the Exhibit 71 version, which he claims was finally

registered with the Copyright Office on December 5, 1996 -- after the summary judgment motion was briefed by

both sides, after oral argument on the motion, and nearly fifteen months after plaintiff's complaint was filed.

Plaintiff insists he is entitled to amend the complaint to include [**7] his post-complaint registration, citing the


207 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

liberal construction of Rule 15, Fed. R. Civ. P. He also points to the fact that the parties have already analyzed

the tape and submitted expert testimony on that version.

Significantly, plaintiff never sought to amend his complaint at any time prior to this court's decision on

defendants' summary judgment motion. In fact, plaintiff has still not sought leave of this court to amend his

[*635] complaint. Thus, there is nothing for the court to "reconsider" because plaintiff's amendment argument was

raised for the first time in this motion for reconsideration. See NL Industries, Inc., 935 F. Supp. at 516

("Reconsideration motions . . . may not be used . . . to raise arguments or present evidence that could have been

raised prior to the entry of judgment.").

Moreover, even a liberal construction of Rule 15 would not permit the amendment of a complaint that has been

dismissed after more than a year of litigation. Bermingham v. Sony Corp., 820 F. Supp. 834, 862 (D.N.J. 1993)

(leave to amend complaint denied after action dismissed when plaintiff had opportunities to amend prior to

dismissal). Plaintiff could have sought leave to amend his complaint [**8] as early as June of 1996, when he

should have become aware through defendants' motion for summary judgment that the Exhibit 71 version was not

registered with the copyright office. He did not do so, however, and chose to join issue upon the non-copyrighted

version. At the time defendants' summary judgment motion was argued, the court could not consider the Exhibit

71 version of "Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration) as the

basis of an infringement claim because it was not registered with the Copyright Office. Plaintiff has offered no

justification for reconsidering that decision.

Plaintiff also argues that the court overlooked the "striking similarity of the background melodies" between

"Dignity" and the Exhibit 71 version of "Steel Guitars." (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982

copyright registration) As previously discussed, the court did not consider the Exhibit 71 version because it was

not registered, and thus could not have overlooked any portion of it. The court did however, determine that the

1988 version of "Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration) was

not substantially similar to Dylan's "Dignity" as it differed "in total concept and feel." (Op. at 16).

Plaintiff's moving papers do not indicate that he is seeking reconsideration of that finding. Thus, the court was

surprised to [**9] receive a document on March 18, 1997, entitled "supplement in support of motion for

reconsideration." Attached to the supplement is a statement by plaintiff's expert Paul D. Greene, Ph.D. pertaining

to the 1988 version of "Steel Guitars," (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright

registration) which had been fully analyzed and dismissed after the court concluded that there was no substantial

similarity from which appropriation could be inferred. In short, plaintiff now seeks to generate new expert opinion

testimony, after judgment has been entered, to contradict this court's finding upon matters which the court had

thoroughly considered when the matter was extensively briefed and argued. Neither L. Civ. R. 7.1 (g), nor any

known concept of jurisprudence, permits a party to generate new expert opinions and offer them, after the fact, as

evidence that the court had somehow overlooked.

The court will not, at this late date, consider evidence which could and should have been submitted earlier. This

court has previously held that "we are in fact bound not to consider such new materials, lest the strictures of our

reconsideration rule erode entirely." Resorts International v. Greate Bay Hotel and Casino, Inc., 830 F. Supp.

826, 831 (D.N.J. [**10] 1992). Even if the court were to consider Dr. Greene's report, however, it would not

disturb the court's determination that summary judgment was appropriate as to plaintiff's music infringement

claim. As discussed in the court's Opinion of December 16, 1996, the final step of an infringement analysis is not

dependent on expert testimony. (Op. at 16). Instead, "the general test for determining substantial similarity is

whether an average lay observer would recognize the alleged copy as having been appropriated from the

copyrighted work." Warner Bros. v. American Broadcasting Co., 654 F.2d 204, 208 (2d Cir. 1981).

Finally, plaintiff attempts to argue in his motion for reconsideration, as he did prior to dismissal of the music

infringement claim, that the Exhibit 71 version is substantially similar to Dylan's "Dignity". Incredibly, to support

this argument, plaintiff submits for the very first time in his reply brief on this motion for reconsideration affidavits

from twelve individuals. Their purported "lay testimony" consists of form affidavits which all include the


208 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

following statements:

I have listened to James Damiano's song "Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982

copyright registration) marked exhibit # 71.

[*636] I [**11] have listened to Bob Dylan's son "Dignity" released on the Bob Dylan, Greatest Hits volume III

album.

It appears to me that the melody of "dignity" is similar to "Steel Guitars"(also identified as "Dignity" on James

Damiano's 1982 copyright registration)

Each of the affidavits is dated March 1, 1997, which was two and one-half months after this claim was

adjudicated. There is no explanation given for why these affidavits were not submitted earlier, in response to

defendants' summary judgment motion and prior to the resolution of this issue on summary judgment. This

evidence, like the supplemental expert statement, will not be considered on plaintiff's motion for reconsideration.

It should be abundantly clear to plaintiff that "[a] litigant seeking reconsideration must show that any new

evidence presented to the court was unavailable or unknown at the time of the original hearing." DeLong Corp. v.

Raymond Int'l, Inc., 622 F.2d 1135, 1140 (3d Cir. 1980). Plaintiff does not attempt to make such a showing, and

by his various attempts to relitigate previously resolved issues with the aid of previously unrevealed evidence,

mocks the reconsideration process.

Thus, the court will not reconsider its decision regarding the 1988 version or the Exhibit [**12] 71 version of

"Steel Guitars" (also identified as "Dignity" on James Damiano's 1982 copyright registration) as plaintiff has failed

to show that a dispositive factual issue or controlling decision law was overlooked. The entry of summary

judgment in favor of defendants on plaintiff's music infringement claim will not be disturbed.

C. Plaintiff's Lyric Infringement Claims

Next, plaintiff argues that the court should reconsider its decision to grant summary judgment on plaintiff's lyric

claims. He argues, as he did in response to defendants' motion for summary judgment, that his unique

arrangements of commonplace lyrics is protectible under copyright laws. In support of this argument, plaintiff

does not raise any factual issues or controlling law which the court overlooked.

Indeed, the court previously carefully considered more than fourteen separate lyrics by plaintiff, some which were

not even included in his complaint, before concluding that plaintiff could not establish a lyric infringement claim

for any of those lyrics. Plaintiff now asks the court to reconsider six of his lyrics, which were all previously

dismissed for various reasons.

1. "Conceit is a disease"

Plaintiff contends that this phrase was infringed by the lyrics of Bob Dylan's 1989 [**13] song "Disease of

Conceit." In the Opinion of December 16, 1996, the court noted that plaintiff had not registered this lyric with the

copyright office. Although plaintiff asserted at oral argument that he was in the process of registering this lyric

when he submitted his opposition brief, he failed to produce any proof of filing to support his claim of pending

registration. (Op. at 8). Thus, summary judgment was granted as to this lyric because plaintiff failed to establish a

prima facie case of infringement.

Plaintiff now claims that he registered this lyric with copyright office on December 5, 1996, and argues that "by

way of amendment to the complaint it must be considered." (Pl. Br. at 6). As noted above, plaintiff has never

moved to amend his complaint as to either his music infringement claim or any of his lyric infringement claims,

nor does he now seek leave to amend. Moreover, as a practical matter, the court does not see how plaintiff could

establish that Dylan infringed a lyric copyrighted by plaintiff in 1996, in a song released by Dylan in 1989.

Plaintiff fails to provide a justification for reconsidering this claim which was dismissed for failure to provide

proof of [**14] ownership of a valid copyright. Plaintiff's post-complaint registration does not cure the defect


209 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

when he made no attempt to amend his complaint prior to the entry of summary judgment.

2. "A different form of treason"

This lyric is one of the twelve considered by the court and found to be unprotectible because the lyrics consisted

of common words or clichï¿½s, or combinations thereof. This lyric in particular, allegedly infringed by Dylan's

line "God don't call it treason," is clearly insufficient to form the basis of an infringement claim. The word

"treason," which is the only word in common between Dylan's lyric and plaintiff's lyric, is not, as plaintiff asserts

in his motion for reconsideration, "anything but a common phrase." To [*637] the contrary, it is an ordinary

single word, used in one context in Damiano's lyric, and another in Dylan's song. Surely, plaintiff cannot think

that he is entitled to prevent all musicians from using the word "treason" in a song because he used it in a single

lyric. Plaintiff does not own the copyright for the word "treason," although plaintiff may be seeking to perfect a

new meaning of the word "frivolous."

3. "Truer words have not been spoken [**15] and once again the truce is broken." This lyric, allegedly infringed

by Dylan's lyric "Truer words have never been spoken or broken" was fully considered by the court when it

rejected plaintiff's argument that Bob Dylan could not, without infringing plaintiff's work, use the clichï¿½ "truer

words have not been spoken" in combination with the rhyming word "broken," even when separated by many

intervening lines and ideas. (Op. at 11). Plaintiff has offered no reasons to reconsider this determination.

4. "What good is a man"

Plaintiff claims that this lyric is infringed by Dylan's lyric "what good am I." Plaintiff urges the court not to accept

as mere coincidence that the common words "what good" were used by both Dylan and Damiano. Plaintiff made

the identical "coincidence" argument in response to summary judgment and has shown the court no controlling

law or fact which was overlooked in rejecting the argument the first time. Plaintiff cannot monopolize the

common interrogatory phrase "what good."

5. "I'm not sure of anything half the time anymore"/"Lost days and forgotten years"

These two claims which appear in plaintiff's complaint were among six lyrics expressly abandoned [**16] by

plaintiff when he failed to address them in response to defendants' motion for summary judgment. These six lyric

were reproduced in the court's Opinion at page six, footnote 2, and summary judgment was granted as to each of

them since plaintiff failed to come forth with any evidence or argument with respect to those claims. (Op. at 6).

Further, at oral argument upon defendants' summary judgment motion, plaintiff's counsel assured the court that he

was limiting his case to the 14 lyrics contained in his opposition brief, and would not be seeking any further

consideration as to the claims which he failed to pursue. Defendants cite to the pertinent colloquy at oral

argument:

THE COURT: But the complaint, I understand I should more or less set aside because the infringements that are

alleged are the 14 items [contained in the Opposition Brief]

MR. KRAMER: Yes, Sir. THE COURT: Is that right? MR. KRAMER: Yes, Sir. THE COURT: Because if I decide

this case based on those 14 items, I don't then want a reconsideration motion by either side that says the dispute

was really different; it had to do with these six songs [contained in the complaint]. MR. KRAMER: [**17] I don't

think Your Honor would face that. THE COURT: All right. MR. KRAMER: At least not from plaintiff. (Tr. at

86). Despite these clear representations by plaintiff's attorney, the court now faces exactly what it was assured it

would not -- a reconsideration motion which seeks to revive two of the abandoned claims. Needless to say, the

court is not impressed with Mr. Kramer's cavalier disregard for his word as an officer of the court. Claims in

litigation are not fungible items to be abandoned and revived at will, rendering plaintiff's theories a moving target.

These claims will not now be considered when plaintiff had every opportunity to make these arguments in

response to defendants' motion for summary judgment but chose not to. Plaintiff's final point, that the court

overlooked plaintiff's overall argument that it was not the use but the combination of common words that formed

the basis of his claims, is completely without merit. Plaintiff argued this point at oral argument and in his papers.

Since he now does no more than express disagreement with the court's decision, his [*638] motion for


210 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

reconsideration as to his lyric infringement claims will be denied. See [**18] Panna, 760 F. Supp. at 435. E.

Plaintiff's State Law Claims

In his final argument, plaintiff argues that the court should reconsider the dismissal of his pendent state law

claims, arguing that although a work may not be copyrightable, it may still be the subject of a state claim. Plaintiff

originally raised claims for misappropriation of property, breach of confidence and fraud. He does not indicate

which of these causes of action is the basis of an argument that the court overlooked a dispositive fact or

controlling decision of law.

Plaintiff merely asserts that he presented evidence that plaintiff gave his lyrics to the defendants and that the lyrics

had not been used by defendants prior to plaintiff's submission. Plaintiff does not explain how this evidence, even

if accepted as true, establishes any of his state law claims. The court held in the December 16, 1996 Opinion that

plaintiff's misappropriation claim was pre-empted by federal copyright law. (Op. at 18). The court further held

that plaintiff failed to establish his breach of confidence claim because he offered no proof that defendants owed

him a duty or that such a duty could have been breached by their actions. [**19] Finally, the court held that

plaintiff failed to produce proof of direct misrepresentations by defendants or that his work was ever used,

incorporated or copied by Dylan. (Op. at 19). While plaintiff obviously disagrees with the court's conclusions, he

has pointed to no factual issue or controlling decision of law which was overlooked by the court in reaching these

decisions. To the extent that plaintiff cites case law that was not previously presented to the court and is not

controlling in this court, those cases will not be considered as support for this motion. Also, the court will deny

plaintiff's request that the court rely upon the recent case of Sons of Thunder, Inc. v. Borden, Inc., 148 N.J. 396,

690 A.2d 575 (1997), because it has no relevance to this case. Sons of Thunder deals with a breach of contract

claim, which plaintiff has not asserted in this case. Therefore, plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of his state law

claims is insufficient and will be denied. III. Conclusion

For the reasons above, plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of the court's Opinion of December 16, 1996,

granting summary judgment to defendants on all of plaintiff's claims, will be denied. [**20] Defendants shall have

twenty (20) days to apply for sanctions under Rule 11, Fed. R. Civ. P., and/or for statutory attorney's fees, as

previously detailed in the Opinion and Order of December 16, 1996. n3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotes- - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - n3 Defendants' initial application for summary judgment on the merits was accompanied by

an application for dismissal as a sanction under Rule 11, Fed. R. Civ. P., for the filing of a complaint not

well-grounded in fact or law. (See Op. filed Dec. 16, 1996, at 2-3). The court deferred consideration of Rule 11

sanctions and/or for attorney's fees under Rule 11 or under the less demanding standard of the Copyright Act, 17

U.S.C. ï¿½ 505, until such an application could be filed, within fourteen days thereafter. (Id. at 3-4). When

defendants sought to enlarge the period to seek attorney's fees because of the prospect that plaintiff would be

seeking reconsideration, the court extended the application deadline until fourteen (14) days after decision of any

reconsideration motion, which is now further enlarged to give sufficient time to include costs and fees expended

in defense of this reconsideration motion as well. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[**21] An appropriate order follows. JEROME B. SIMANDLE United States District Judge ORDER This matter

having come before the court upon plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of the court's Opinion and Order dated

December 16, 1996, in which the court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment as to all of plaintiff's

federal and state claims; and the court having considered the submissions of the parties; and for the reasons set

forth in the Opinion of today's date; IT IS this 20th day of August, 1997, hereby ORDERED that plaintiff's

motion for reconsideration be and hereby is DENIED, and that any application by defendants for sanctions under

Rule 11, Fed. R. Civ. P., [*639] and/or for statutory attorney's fees shall be filed within twenty (20) days hereof.

JEROME B. SIMANDLE United States District Judge

The New York law journal released the following article below.

Blowin' on the Web

It wasn't until a Web site carrying confidential deposition transcripts had attracted more than a million hits that


211 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

attorneys for Bob Dylan and Sony Records even caught on to the fact that there was a problem. Dylan and his

record company had been unsuccessfully sued by a New Jersey man who alleged that the veteran songwriter had

stolen lyrics from him. A confidentiality order for discovery material had been granted in 1996 after the

defendants argued that James Damiano sought to commercially exploit his allegations against Dylan. When the

case was thrown out of district court and then dismissed by the appellate court ( Damiano v. Sony Music

Entertainment Inc. , 975 F.Supp. 623), the defense attorneys figured that the defendant would continue to respect

the confidentiality order. But Damiano, who wound up representing himself after his attorney was disbarred in

New York and suspended in New Jersey, says he was frustrated by the injustice of his situation and has "a right to

tell my story," he said. After realizing that the information had been posted on Damiano's Web site, defense

lawyer Steven Johnson, of Philadelphia's Hecker Brown Sherry and Johnson, moved for a contempt finding

against Damiano, which was granted Oct. 29. The consequences have yet to be determined. Damiano, meanwhile,

has pulled down his Web site and has promised to try to contact those who've elsewhere posted deposition

testimony taken from the site. Johnson, for his part, says the case has taught him the need to make absolutely

clear -- as in perfectly plain English -- to opposing parties what their obligations are and make sure that a

confidentiality order explicitly addresses information that finds its way to the Internet. http://www.callaw.com

/weekly/glitz/glitzy15.html

Di Mari Ricker, a contributing writer at California Law Week , covers entertainment law for American Lawyer

Media.

Even after this article was published in the law journal Bob Dylan did not file a slander suit.

The song displayed below was submitted to Elliot Mintz,Tony Tiller and other members of Dylan's entourage.

I was sitting in a downtown

Village coffeehouse

Listening to the guitarist

strummin the strings

Just wandering somewhere

In a daze of thoughts

among a million other things

he took a break

put down the guitar

Came down off the stage

walked over to my table

sat down to talk

said hello through

the haze

Lost days and forgotten years

Washed away from tears

Spoke just ten words


212 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

And I knew him well

And everyone of his fears

He claimed to be a Christian

With fierce certainty

believed for sure

He'd be saved through

Christianity

Made me read the Bible

Wanted me to see

Dragged me into his home

To pray over me


Washed away by tears

Spoke just ten words and I

Knew him well

and everyone of his fears

His religion turned to superstition

And he thought he understood

All the wrong there is

In this world to understand

And all there is that's good

Allegations exist that the melody line of "Knockin on Heavens Door" is the same melody line as Neil Young's

song "Helpless". Please note Neil Young's was released and played on the radio five years before Bob Dylan

released "Knockin on Heavens door". A similar allegation exists as to Bob Dylan's song "Like A Rolling Stone"

and "Hang On Sloopy". The melody line is the same. "Hang on Sloopy" was released and played on the radio

seven years before Dylan released "Like A Rolling Stone" Other allegations exist that Bob Dylan "Shelter From

The Storm" is the exact same melody line as John Fogerty's "Down Around The Corner" It is unconstitutional for

this court to accept as truth the biased contention of Bob Dylan's attorney, Orin Snyder, when no unbiased facts

exist to support Mr. Snyderï¿½s allegation that James Damiano attempted to commercially exploit his claims

against Mr. Dylan, in which defendants utilized to obtain a confidentiality order in this law suit designating all

discovery materials as confidential and which Judge Simandle cited as the primary basis for the dismissal of this

law suit. It is also difficult to display the extent of Bob Dylan's guilt when the evidence which incriminates Mr.

Dylan is designated as confidential. "Bob Dylan's surreptitious solicitation of James Damiano's songs warrants a

mandate for justice to be corrected." Library of Congress registration number TXU 547-786 A paramount

signature of what has become of the United States Judicial System


213 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

copyright Damiano 1988

Bob Dylan has pertinent information concerning allegations brought forth by his attorney's on his behalf and must

come to court to answer pertinent questions concerning his Motion to hold plaintiff James Damiano in contempt

for alleged violations of Judge Joel B. Rosenï¿½s order designating all discovery materials as confidential. See

below notice for Bob Dylan to appear.


DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY JAMES DAMIANO

VS.

CV95-4795 (JBS)

BOB DYLAN. ET AL

NOTICE TO APPEAR

VIA FAX AND MOTION

Please take notice that plaintiff, James Damiano shall subpoena Bob Dylan on November 11, 1999 at 1:30 PM, at

One John F Gerry Plaza, Camden New Jersey, 08010 to testify in the above case in reference to defendants

motion to hold plaintiff James Damiano in contempt for violations of Judge Joel B. Rosenï¿½s order for

confidentiality.

Subpoena attached. James Damiano___________

Dated 11/11/99


James Damiano certifies that he served the foregoing notice to appear to Steven D. Johnson counsel for Bob

Dylan.

James Damiano____________________________ Parcher Hayes 382 0200

This lawsuit James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan for copyright infringement Civil # 95-4795 (JBS) was dismissed

without prejudice by The Honorable Judge Jerome B. Simandle (Federal Court)Camden, District of New Jersey).

All documents and statements contained in this document have been produced to Bob Dylan's attorney Orin

Snyder of Parcher Hayes & Snyder 500 5th Avenue New York New York.




against

BOB DYLAN Defendants


214 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

SUPPLEMENT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION OF RECONSIDERATION OF JUDGE JEROME B.

SIMANDLE'S MEMORANDUM OPINION OF FINDING JAMES DAMIANO IN CONTEMPT FOR

ALLEGEDLY VIOLATING JUDGE JOEL B. ROSIN'S CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER, MOTION TO VACATE

SAID ORDER, MOTION FOR ADMISSIONS, MOTION TO REVERSE JUDGE SIMANDLE'S DISMISSAL

AND OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS BRIEF OPPOSING SAID MOTION

Due to the amount of fraud committed in this suit Plaintiff James Damiano is forced to serve Bob Dylan through

the internet. A CD ROM containing the information cited in this website was sent to Bob Dylan's attorney Orin

Snyder of Parcher Hayes and Snyder

James Damiano hereby serves Bob Dylan via E-mail to Steven D. Johnson.

This website address has been e-mailed To Bob Dylan's attorney Steven D. Johnson

After six and a half years, thirty five hours of depositions, and after three and a half million dollars have been

spent on this litigation there has not been a counter-suit, libel suit, or defamation suit filed by Bob Dylan and or

Sony Music Entertainment.

Plaintiff's website declaration containing the material facts cited in this document was posted on the world wide

internet for six years and five months and defendants still to this date, June 1 2002 have not contested the issues

of fact or the issues of solicitation by defendants of plaintiffs songs cited herein.



No unbiased facts, no unbiased evidence or no unbiased testimony exists to support Judge Jerome B. Simandle of

the United States federal court, District of New Jersey's decision to dismiss Plaintiff James Domino's lawsuit

against Bob Dylan for copyright infringement case no 95- 4795 (JBS).


___________________________________________________________

James Damiano ______________________

The following letter was sent to James Damiano

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],





[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], "jess clarck" , [email protected],

[email protected], [email protected] From: "Jesse Clark" Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 07:03:57 -0700

(PDT) Subject: [bobdylan] Office of the Courts Hon. Richard J. Williams, Administrative Director of New Jersey

Courts P.O. Box 001 Trenton NJ 08625-0001 Dear Judge Williams: I am the plaintiff in a copyright infringement

law suit with the singer / songwriter Bob Dylan. I have extensive evidence of fraud committed by attorneys for

Bob Dylan, Orin Snyder Esq. of Parcher Hayes & Snyder, and Steven D. Johnson Esq. of Hecker Brown Sherry

& Johnson. I recently found a letter which mysteriously appeared in my home sent to me by Governor Whitman's

office directing me to you. Please find enclosed information concerning Orin Snyder and Steven D. Johnson's

fraud Thank you Sincerely James Damiano State on New Jersey Office of the Governor P.O. Box 001 Trenton NJ

08625-00001 Mr. James Damiano XXX XXX Court Lakewood, New Jersey 08701 Dear Mr. Damiano: Thank

you for writing Governor Whitman. I appreciate the opportunity to respond on her behalf. Please be advised that


215 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

the constituitional separation of powers prohibits the Governor's involvement in judicial matters. Given the nature

of your correspondence, I have asked Richard J. Williams, acting administrative director of the Administrative

Office of the Courts, which is part of the judicial branch of government, to review your concerns and respond to

you directly. I trust that the reply you receive will be helpful to you. Should you wish to contact Acting

Administrative Director Williams, you can write to the Administrative Office of the Courts, Richard J. Hughes

Justice Complex, P.O. Box 037, Trenton, NJ 08625, or call (609) 984-0078. Again, thank you for writing to

Governor Whitman. Best wishes. Sincerely, Matthew J. Buckley Aide to the Governor

She's got so much to learn

But then again so do I

Will I ever be good enough for her

Will she find the truth out

When she dies

But she's the one

Who brought it up

Could she be the devils bait

I picked up this pen

I wrote this confession

I wrote

Rosie

I'm out of faith

Bob Dylan played at President Clinton's inaugural ball"

An aerial view of the "Reunion on the Mall" held as part of the Clinton/Gore Inaugural. With tents stretching

from the Capitol to the Washington Monument, it was reported to be the largest festival ever held on the Mall.

This photo was taken from a U.S. Park Police helicopter hovering so the top of the Monument is in the

foreground of the picture.

A dramatic night photo of the Washington Monument covered by lights during the ceremonies marking the

opening of the Clinton/Gore Inaugural. The Lincoln Memorial and a bank of spotlights are in the background.

This photo was taken from the top of the clock tower on the Smithsonian Castle building on the Mall.

Hillary Clinton greets visitors and shakes hands along a fence on the Mall in Washington during her visit to "The

Reunion on the Mall" held as part of the Clinton/Gore Inaugural.

An aerial view of the Lincoln Memorial during the "Call for Reunion," a two-hour outdoor concert kicking off the

Clinton/Gore Inaugural. Hundreds of thousands of people crowded onto the Mall for the free concert which

featured such entertainers as Aretha Franklin, Michael Bolton, Tony Bennett, Bob Dylan, Diana Ross and rapper

L-L Cool J.


216 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

The Clintons and the Gores wave to the crowd at the opening to the "Call for Reunion" a two-hour outdoor

concert kicking off the Clinton/Gore Inaugural. Hundreds of thousands of people crowded onto the Mall for the

free concert. Dec. 20, 2004 11:26am ET

The Early Show CBS Evening News 48 Hours 60 Minutes (SUN) 60 Minutes (WED) All Broadcasts

Dylan Looks Back

On Dec. 5, 2004 CBS interviewed Bob Dylan

Dylan Breaks His Silence

Bob Dylan appears on 60 Minutes in his first television interview in nearly 20 years. (Photo: CBS)

"I never wanted to be a prophet or a savior. Elvis maybe. I could see myself becoming him. But prophet? No."

Bob Dylan

The music legend talks to Ed Bradley about his career, the press, and his family. (Photo: CBS/60 Minutes)

Chronicles, Volume One

(CBS) There is no living musician who has been more influential than Bob Dylan.

Over a 43-year career, his distinctive twang and poetic lyrics have produced some of the most memorable songs

ever written. In the '60s, his songs of protest and turmoil spoke to an entire generation.

While his life has been the subject of endless interpretation, Dylan has been largely silent. Now, at 63, he has

written a memoir called "Chronicles, Volume One." Correspondent Ed Bradley got to sit down with this music

legend in his first television interview in nearly 20 years.

Dylan is mysterious, elusive, fascinating ï¿½ just like his music.

Over more than four decades, Dylan has produced 500 songs and more than 40 albums. Does he ever look back at

the music he's written with surprise?

"I used to. I don't do that anymore. I don't know how I got to write those songs. Those early songs were almost

magically written," says Dylan, who quotes from his 1964 classic, "It's Alright, Ma."

"Try to sit down and write something like that. There's a magic to that, and it's not Siegfried and Roy kind of

magic, you know? It's a different kind of a penetrating magic. And, you know, I did it. I did it at one time."

Does he think he can do it again today? No, says Dylan. "You can't do something forever," he says. "I did it once,

and I can do other things now. But, I can't do that."

Dylan has been writing music since he was a teenager in the remote town of Hibbing, Minn. He was the eldest of

two sons of Abraham and Beatty Zimmerman.

How was his childhood? "I really didn't consider myself happy or unhappy," says Dylan. "I always knew that

there was something out there that I needed to get to. And it wasn't where I was at that particular moment."

In his book, Dylan writes that he came alive at 19, when he moved to Greenwich Village in New York City ï¿½

which at the time was the frenetic center of the '60s counterculture. Within months, Dylan had signed a recording


217 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

contract with Columbia Records.

"You refer to New York as the capital of the world. But when you told your father that, he thought that it was a

joke," says Bradley. "Did your parents approve of you being a singer-songwriter? Going to New York?"

"No. They wouldn't have wanted that for me. But my parents never went anywhere," says Dylan. "My father

probably thought the capital of the world was wherever he was at the time. It couldn't possibly be anyplace else.

Where he and his wife were in their own home, that, for them, was the capital of the world."

So what made Dylan different? What pushed him out there?

"I listened to the radio a lot. I hung out in the record stores. And I slam-banged around on the guitar and played

the piano and learned songs from a world which didn't exist around me," says Dylan.

He says that he knew even then that he was destined to become a music legend. "I was heading for the fantastic

lights," he writes. "Destiny was looking right at me and nobody else."

What does the word "destiny" mean to Dylan?

"It's a feeling you have that you know something about yourself - nobody else does - the picture you have in your

mind of what you're about will come true," says Dylan. "It's kind of a thing you kind of have to keep to your own

self, because it's a fragile feeling. And if you put it out there, somebody will kill it. So, itï¿½s best to keep that all

inside."

When Bradley asked Dylan why he changed his name from Robert Zimmerman, he said that was destiny, too.

"Some people ï¿½ you're born, you know, the wrong names, wrong parents. I mean, that happens," says Dylan.

"You call yourself what you want to call yourself. This is the land of the free."

Dylan created a world inspired by old folk music, with piercing and poetic lyrics, in songs such as "A Hard

Rainï¿½s A-Gonna Fall." These were songs that reflected the tension and unrest of the civil rights and anti-war

movements of the '60s.

It was an explosive mixture that turned Dylan, by 25, into a cultural and political icon - playing to sold out

concert halls around the world, and followed by people wherever he went. Dylan was called the voice of his

generation ï¿½ and was actually referred to as a prophet, a messiah.

Yet Dylan says he saw himself simply as a musician: "You feel like an impostor when someone thinks you're

something and you're not."

What was the image that people had of him? And what was the reality?

"The image of me was certainly not a songwriter or a singer," says Dylan. "It was more like some kind of a threat

to society in some kind of way."

What was the toughest part for him personally? "It was like being in an Edgar Allan Poe story. And you're just not

that person everybody thinks you are, though they call you that all the time," says Dylan. "'You're the prophet.

You're the savior.' I never wanted to be a prophet or savior. Elvis maybe. I could easily see myself becoming him.

But prophet? No."

He may not have seen himself as the voice of the '60s generation, but his songs were viewed as anthems that

sparked a moment.

"My stuff were songs, you know? They weren't sermons," says Dylan. "If you examine the songs, I don't believe


218 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

you're gonna find anything in there that says that I'm a spokesman for anybody or anything really."

"But they saw it," says Bradley.

"They must not have heard the songs," says Dylan.

"It's ironic, that the way that people viewed you was just the polar opposite of the way you viewed yourself," says

Bradley.

"Isn't that something," says Dylan.

Dylan did almost anything to shatter the lofty image many people had of him. He writes that he intentionally

made bad records, and once poured whiskey over his head in public.

He also writes that, as a stunt, he went to Israel and made a point of having his picture taken at the Wailing Wall

wearing a skullcap. When he went to Israel, he writes that the newspapers changed him overnight into a Zionist.

How did this help?

"If the common perception of me out there in the public was that I was either a drunk, or I was a sicko, or a

Zionist, or a Buddhist, or a Catholic, or a Mormon ï¿½ all of this was better than 'Archbishop of Anarchy,'" says

Dylan, referring to being considered the voice of a generation opposed to everything.

Dylan was especially opposed to the media, which he says were always trying to pin him down. He wrote, "The

press, I figured, you lied to it." Why?

"I realized at the time that the press, the media, they're not the judge - God's the judge," says Dylan. "The only

person you have to think about lying twice to is either yourself or to God. The press isn't either of them. And I

just figured they're irrelevant."

Dylan tried to run away from all of that. In the mid-'60s, he retreated with his wife and three young children to

Woodstock, N.Y. But even there, he couldnï¿½t escape the legions of fans who descended on his home, begging

for an audience with the legend himself. He says people would actually come to the house, wanting to "discuss

things with me, politics and philosophy and organic farming and things."

What did Dylan know about organic farming? "Nothing," he says. "Not a thing."

What did he mean when he wrote that "the funny thing about fame is that nobody believes it's you"?

"People, they'll say, 'Are you who I think you are?' And you'll say, 'I don't know.' Then, they'll say, 'You're him.'

And you'll say, 'OK, you know, that ï¿½ yes,'" says Dylan. "And then, the next thing they'll say, 'Well, no, you

know? Like are you really him? You're not him.' And, you know, that can go on and on."

He says he doesn't like to eat in restaurants because of all the attention he gets. And he says he has never gotten

use to it.

At his peak, fame was taking its toll on Dylan. He was heading toward a divorce from his wife, Sara. And in

concerts, he wore white makeup to mask himself. But his songs revealed the pain.

About his ex-wife, Dylan says: "She was with me back then, through thick and thin, you know? And it just wasn't

the kind of life that she had ever envisioned for herself, any more the than the kind of life that I was living, that I

had envisioned for mine."

By the mid-1980s, Dylan felt he was burned out and over the hill. And he wrote some pretty harsh words about


219 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

himself: "I'm a '60s troubadour, a folk-rock relic. A wordsmith from bygone days. I'm in the bottomless pit of

cultural oblivion."

"I'd seen all these titles written about me," says Dylan. "I believed it, anyway. I wasn't getting any thrill out of

performing. I thought it might be time to close it up. ï¿½ I had thought I'd just put it away for a while. But then I

started thinking, 'That's enough, you know?'"

But within a few years, Dylan said he had recaptured his creative spark, and went back on the road. He performed

more than 100 concerts a year. And he won three Grammy awards in 1998 for his album, "Time Out Of Mind."

At 63, Dylan remains a voice as unique and powerful as any there has ever been in American music.

His fellow musicians paid tribute to him when he was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, joining him

in a rousing rendition of his most famous song, "Like a Rolling Stone." That song was recently named by Rolling

Stone magazine as the No. 1 song of all time. And he has 12 other songs on their list of the Top 500.

"That must be good to have as part of your legacy," says Bradley.

"Oh, maybe this week. But you know, the list, they change names, and you know, quite frequently, really. I don't

really pay much attention to that," says Dylan.

"But it's a pat on the back," says Bradley.

"This week it is," Dylan replies. "But who's to say how long that's gonna last?"

His success, however, has lasted a long time. Dylan is still performing all of his songs on tour, and he says he

doesn't take any of it for granted.

So why is he still out there?

"It goes back to that destiny thing. I mean, I made a bargain with it, you know, long time ago. And I'm holding up

my end ï¿½ to get where I am now," says Dylan.

And with whom did he make the bargain? "With the chief commander," says Dylan, laughing. "In this earth and in

the world we can't see."

Dylan has been nominated this year for the Nobel Prize in literature for his songwriting. His new book has been a

bestseller for the past seven weeks. It was published by Simon & Schuster, which is owned by Viacom, the parent

company of CBS. Dylan is planning to write two more volumes of his memoirs.

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],



"Vision DJ Management" , [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],



[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

http://www.geocities.com/proposal112000/james_Damaino.html

The following article was written by Geoff McMaster on February 21, 2003 Bob Dylan's loving thievery Is Bob

Dylan a genius or a thief? by Geoff McMaster Folio Staff


220 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Bob Dylan often walks a fine line between plagiarism and allusion, and therein lies his genius.

That was the conclusion of Dylan biographer and former University of Alberta professor Dr. Stephen Scobie at a

unique symposium sponsored by the English Department. Scobie, a celebrated poet in his own right,

demonstrated myriad ways in which Bob Dylan unabashedly weaves an intertext of quotations in many of his

lyrics.

Pointing to the song High Water (for Charley Patton) from Dylan's 2001 release, "Love and Theft", Scobie noted

that the song included more than a dozen quotations from sources as varied as English Nursery Rhymes, African-

American Blues, an obscure 1950s pop song, and even Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre. In some instances, whole

lines and even couplets are lifted verbatim from the source.

The title of the album itself, "Love and Theft", deliberately set in quotation marks on the CD cover, can be seen

as Dylan's acknowledgment that songwriting intensely engages with both acts.

"Dylan takes the whole idea of love and theft very seriously," said Scobie. "He loves the stuff, but also

unashamedly steals it." You could call it post-modern intertextuality, or "good old-fashioned plagiarism," said

Scobie. "At what point does allusion become quotation or become theft?"

But the result, at least under the stroke of Dylan's pen, is a dazzling and evocative tapestry. The song becomes

more suggestive, opens up more thematic directions, upon each listening. And, Scobie asks, what act of writing

isn't on some level an act of theft anyway?

Scobie has spent enough time with Dylan's lyrics, with the tradition of English literature, and with the "love and

theft" of writing poetry to know. He's written two books on Dylan, one a critical work called Alias Bob Dylan

(soon to be re-released), and one a poem sequence called And Forget My Name: A Speculative Biography of Bob

Dylan. The University of Victoria English professor has also won the Governor General's Award for McAlmon's

Chinese Opera.

Since Scobie was on campus as external examiner for a doctoral defense, the English department's visiting speaker

chair, Dr. Ted Bishop, thought it would be the perfect opportunity to snag him for a talk in the Culture on the

Edge lecture series.

"What I'm trying to do with all of these is to arrange talks of interest to a wider community than just honours

English students, or indeed students from the Faculty of Arts," Bishop said. Previous talks have taken up The

Sopranos television series and motorcycle culture.

The Dylan talk was held at Fiore's Cantina on 109th Street to provide some distance from the sometimes-stifling

environment of academia, says Bishop. "The idea is to try and take something into the community; people have a

different kind of discussion when they are off campus."

Bishop also invited local CKUA radio announcer and musician Lionel Rault to play a few Dylan songs and talk

about Dylan's influence on his own songwriting. Rault pointed out that Dylan's borrowing of material is an

organic feature of both the blues and folk music traditions in North America. Indeed, many blues artists would

just add a single verse, or even just one line, to a song in circulation and call it their own, he said.

"Bob was also messing around with the persona of the beat poet, and it was a very attractive combination of

things," said Rault, recalling his own early days as a professional musician hugely influenced by the master

songwriter.

"I went right down that lost highway as quickly as I could get there after I heard Bob Dylan doing it."

Jim Edwards of the New Jersey Law Journal has written a factually inaccurate article about the James Damiano /


221 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Bob Dylan copyright infringement litigation. The facts contained in this motion are the true facts and uncontested

facts of this case. To display the motive behind Jim Edwards' publishing of his inaccurate article we have this to

say:

Mr Edwards did not include the following website address of this motion http://www.geocities.com

/proposal112000/James_Damiano.html )in his article which disabled his readers from drawing a subjective and

unbiased opinion of this litigation.

Plaintiff James Damiano also contends that it is uncontested that Bob Dylan's lead attorney Orin Snyder Esq. has

comitted an abundance of fraud in this litigation and that he has notified Judge Simandle and Mr. Snyder's

attorney Mary Jo White of said fraud and that Mr. Snyder has been aware of Mr. Damiano's statements against

him for a number of years and that Orin Snyder has not contested James Damiano's documented statements about

him.

News Release December 5, 2003 James Damiano has released a new cd "Justice" and also The movie "Dignity"

Episode 1

(a) For Claimant.

A party seeking to recover upon a claim, counterclaim, or cross-claim or to obtain a declaratory judgment may, at

any time after the expiration of 20 days from the commencement of the action or after service of a motion for

summary judgment by the adverse party, move with or without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in

the party's favor upon all or any part thereof.

(b) For Defending Party.

A party against whom a claim, counterclaim, or cross-claim is asserted or a declaratory judgment is sought may, at

any time, move with or without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in the party's favor as to all or any

part thereof.

(c) Motion and Proceedings Thereon. The motion shall be served at least 10 days before the time fixed for the

hearing. The adverse party prior to the day of hearing may serve opposing affidavits.

(e) Form of Affidavits; Further Testimony; Defense Required. Supporting and opposing affidavits shall be made

on personal knowledge, shall set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence, and shall show affirmatively

that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated therein. Sworn or certified copies of all papers or parts

thereof referred to in an affidavit shall be attached thereto or served therewith. The court may permit affidavits to

be supplemented or opposed by depositions, answers to interrogatories, or further affidavits. When a motion for

summary judgment is made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere

allegations or denials of the adverse party's pleading, but the adverse party's response, by affidavits or as otherwise

provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If the adverse

party does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against the adverse party.

(f) When Affidavits are Unavailable. Should it appear from the affidavits of a party opposing the motion that the

party cannot for reasons stated present by affidavit facts essential to justify the party's opposition, the court may

refuse the application for judgment or may order a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained or depositions

to be taken or discovery to be had or may make such other order as is just.

(g) Affidavits Made in Bad Faith. Should it appear to the satisfaction of the court at any time that any of the

affidavits presented pursuant to this rule are presented in bad faith or solely for the purpose of delay, the court

shall forthwith order the party employing them to pay to the other party the amount of the reasonable expenses

which the filing of the affidavits caused the other party to incur, including reasonable attorney's fees, and any

offending party or attorney may be adjudged guilty of contempt. On June 18th James Damiano E-mailed the


222 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

following E-mail to Bob Dylan's attorney Steven D. Johnson.

Hecker Brown Sherry and Johnson LLP


18th and Arch Streets

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2769

Telephone: 215-446-6264

Fax: 215-636-0366

900 Haddon Ave

Suite 412

Collingswood, New Jersey 08108-1903

Telephone: 856-796-9000

Fax: 856-796-9006

[email protected]

http://www.heckerbrown.com

Dear Mr. Johnson

You are beyond the date returnable to answer James Damiano's motion. In fact you are more than sixty days late.

You cannot hide from this matter anymore. There are witnesses that you have been served. You must notify Orin

Snyder which I'm, sure you have done. I spoke to the US marshal's service and they wanted to know when you

were served initially. I told them you were served through E-mail in June 2002.

We are out of courtesy sending it to you via your E-mail address at [email protected] once again.

Dear Mr. Johnson: Please find enclosed a link to Plaintiff's motion to vacate Judge Joel B. Rosen's order for

confidentiality, Motion for Admissions, and other motions RE James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan for Copyright

Infringement CV 95-4795 JBS.

Bob Dylan's suppression of the truth (The confidentiality order) is adverse to the truth being a defense for libel

and the first amendment, (Freedom of Speech).

Judge Simandle's decision is in conflict and adverse to the first amendment.

Basic and simple: In every deposition of this lawsuit the witness's were sworn to tell the truth. The truth is a

perfect defense for libel yet, all depositions were designated confidential by Judge Joel B. Rosen.

Damiano was found guilty of contempt for posting the truth on the Internet. He was unable to protect himself

with deposition's that incriminate Bob Dylan.

He was unable to protect himself with the truth. That concept is un-American.


223 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Judge Simandle's ruling to hold James Damiano in contempt for disseminating

deposition materials on the Internet in violation of the courts confidentiality order designating all discovery

materials confidential in James Damiano Vs. Bob Dylan for copyright infringement ( CV 95-4795 JBS )

jeopardizes the first amendment Rights, of every American.

Elliot Mintz who is Bob Dylan's publicist testified in a video taped deposition the following:

"Under the subject of mistruths spoken to your client during the course of these telephone conversations he

would frequently ask me to pass along information to Bob, asked questions about Bob or to Bob about him and I

in fact told him that I would and that I did and on those occasions, that of course was a mistruth. [Deposition of

Elliot Mintz]

Mr. Mintz's deposition is 183 pages. Further Judge Simandle opined:

Plaintiff asserts that "the bulk of his life's work" was submitted to Sony beginning in 1982. (Compl. at 2). He also

alleges that he was told to bring his songs to several concerts which he attended courtesy of Sony. Plaintiff has

produced evidence that after these [**18] concerts, he was allowed backstage and gave his work to Dylan or his

agents. (Damiano Decl. at PP 2, 5; Dep. of Pam Damiano at 77-84, 97-104; Dep. of Brad Wright at 105-112).

Taking these allegations as true, plaintiff has demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact as to whether

defendants had access to his work. From Judge Simandle's Decision END OF E-MAIL

RE Damiano V. Bob Dylan for copyright infringement. CV 95-4795 (JBS)

The following letter has been E-mailed to Bob Dylan's attorney Steven D. Johnson and all the partners and

associates of the firm Hecker Brown Sherry & Johnson. Dear Firm:

Please be informed that Steven D. Johnson and Orin Snyder have committed an abundance of fraud in their

motion to hold James Damiano in contempt Re: James Damiano Vs. Bob Dylan for copyright infringement. CV

95-4795 (JBS).

Orin Snyder and Steven D. Johnson both were aware that there were eleven years of documented facts of James

Damiano's association with Bob Dylan and Dylan's management.

Not only did Orin Snyder and Steven D. Johnson ignore Mr. Damiano's testimony regarding, Mr. Damiano

working with CBS for eleven years. They never denied or Contested, Mr. Damiano's testimony.

Also, Bob Dylan, Orin Snyder and or Mr. Johnson never contested or denied Mr. Damiano's Testimony regarding

Bob Dylan's solicitation of plaintiff Damiano's music.

All of said facts incriminate Mr. Dylan and were left disregarded and unresolved after Judge Simandle's decision

to dismiss the case . The courts dismissal endorsed the appearance of partiality by Judge Simandle.

All decisions by Judge Simandle in this case were at best subjective.

Disregarding Judge Simandle's subjective decisions, Orin Snyder and Steven D. Johnson's knowledge of these

facts document the extent of their fraud in filing a motion to have James Damiano held in contempt of the courts

confidentiality order. The legality of the confidentiality order is irrelevant given the fact that someone

anonymously published and posted Mr. Damiano's website on the World Wide Internet for the last six and a half

years and defendants Bob Dylan and Sony Music have not filed a motion to have it taken off the internet.

Judge Simandle's decision to dismiss is inconsistent with the evidence produced to the court. Many lawsuits have


224 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

survived summary judgment with only a few material facts .In this case Damiano has fifty hours of video taped

depositions which incriminate Bob Dylan and Bob Dylan's attorney Orin Snyder ( who forgot he was wearing a

microphone at the Elliot Mintz's deposition ), eleven years of documented facts of Dylan's solicitation of

Damiano's music, extremely credible expert testimony from a Harvard musicologist with a PH-D, and sworn

blatant admissions of guilt by defendants.

All of the above evidence was disregard by the court when Judge Jerome B. Simandle dismissed the lawsuit in

summary Judgment. ( Defendant first procedural motion, which was not legally substantial enough to warrant

summary judgment.)Orin Snyder and Steven D. Johnson filed their contempt motion to hold JamesDamiano in

violation of the confidentiality order based on Damiano disseminating said facts and deposition materials on the

Internet, all of which incriminate their client Bob Dylan.

Plaintiff Damiano produces the following transcript in support of his proof that it is conclusive that Orin Snyder

and Steven D. Johnson were aware of Damiano's "Eleven Years" association with Bob Dylan and CBS Records

thus both Snyder and Johnson who are attorneys for Bob Dylan committed fraud.

In the following transcript James Damiano testified under oath in his contempt hearing in front of The Honorable

Judge Jerome B. Simandle :"I feel like there is so much testimony and documentation of your clients solicitation

of my music over a period of eleven years, and there's deposition materials to that effect which no one made

reference to in the lawsuit, I feel it's an unfair decision. I feel that I wrote songs for eleven years with Mikie Harris,

those songs showed up on Bob Dylan's albums. No one ever made referenceto the eleven years that I worked with

CBS. No, No, one's ever contested those issues."

NEW EVIDENCE

It is judicially conclusive that Judge Simandle's decision to dismiss this lawsuit violated standard law procedure as

pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).

Throughout the litigation and discovery of this lawsuit and after the dismissal of Plaintiff's reconsideration motion

Bob Dylan's lead attorneys Orin Snyder and Steven D. Johnson engaged in unlawful, unscrupulous illegal and

unethical practices.

Mr. Snyder's, as well as Steven D. Johnson's, unlawful and nefarious behavior is documented in this motion.

Plaintiff has learned of allegations that Mr. Snyder and or other associates of Mr. Snyder's law firm have

committed this same unlawful and unscrupulous behavior in another lawsuit.

In James Damiano Vs. Sony Music Inc and Bob Dylan Judge Simandle wrote in his decision ï¿½

Thus, there is nothing for the court to "reconsider" because plaintiff's amendment argument was raised for the first

time in this motion for reconsideration. See NL Industries, Inc., 935 F. Supp. at 516 ("Reconsideration motions . .

. may not be used . . . to raise arguments or present evidence that could have been raised prior to the entry of

judgment.").

Plaintiff stipulates that the following evidence did not exist until after the dismissal of this lawsuit. This evidence

also did not exist until after Plaintiff filed his last reconsideration motion thus could not have raised these issues

prior to summary judgment.

It has been recently reported in the media, that the lead attorney representing Bob Dylan in this action Orin

Snyder has been accused of falsifying evidence and lying in a lawsuit.

Mr. Snyder retained Mary Jo While as legal counsel.


225 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Plaintiff notified Mr. Snyder's attorney Mary Jo White via Ms. White's E-mail address. See document below.

RE: James Damano Vs Bob Dylan CV 95-4795 (JBS) Infringement

Debevoise & Plimpton

Mary Jo White

919 Third Avenue

New York, NY 10022

Dear Ms. White:

I am the plaintiff in James Damano Vs Bob Dylan CV 95-4795 (JBS)

I am acting pro se in this matter. You have not responded to my last E-mail to you so I am resubmitting it to you

once again.

I have learned of allegations that Bob Dylan's attorneys Jonathan Liebman and or Orin Snyder lied to the court

and falsified documents in the Selletti Vs Carey lawsuit see article below.

Mariah 'Hero' Sued For $20 Million

Mariah Carey has a legal case that won't go away. On Friday, I was faxed papers showing that Christopher Selletti

is suing her again over the song Hero.

He wants $20 million in damages. Selletti is also suing Carey's attorneys, Orin Snyder and Jonathan Liebman

(now with Brillstein Grey Entertainment) and her songwriting partner Walter Afanasieff. He accuses them of

falsifying evidence and lying in the Hero case.

Selletti has tried suing Carey before over Hero, only to have his case dismissed. But, as I first reported six years

ago, there is a lot of questionable stuff in this case. Enough to warrant a real trial with real testimony presided

over by an objective jurist but Judge Denny Chin has consistently done strange things regarding this case and

these participants.

In the 60-plus page document, Selletti's attorney Jeffrey Levitt cites many of Chin's odd decisions.

I am sorry to say that this is precisely what Orin Snyder of Parcher Hayes & Snyder did in my lawsuit after

learning that my copyright registration predated Bob Dylan's copyright registration.

Exactly what they did was produce what they claimed to be "Bob Dylan creation materials" which were analyzed

by my expert Dr. Green, a musicologist from Harvard who concluded that the Dylan creation materials did not at

all provide, any evidence, as to the independent creation of the Song, "Dignity".

I am requesting that you send me all documents relevant to the above allegations.

I will be filing an ethics complaint with the office of attorney ethics against Orin Snyder. I will also be submitting

this motion, as an exhibit.

I am also requesting that you forward the following E-mail which contains a link to my Motion to reverse the

courts decision to dismiss to Orin Snyder and Parcher and Hayes.


226 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

I was surprised to learn Parcher Hayes and Snyder do not have a website for their firm.

In the near future or when time permits Mr. Damiano will be visiting the Manhattan Court where this matter is

being adjudicated to read a copy of the complaint and review the pleadings . After doing so Plaintiff Damiano will

submit a copy of that complaint to this court.

The following information is a summary of what occurred in James Damiano Vs. Bob Dylan through the eyes of

an American filmmaker, a director and the plaintiff.James Damiano. Please be assured all statements are true and

correct

Sincerely James Damiano

James Damiano Vs. Bob Dylan CV 95-4795 JBS

Few artists can lay claim to the controversy that has surrounded the career of songwriter, James Damiano.

Twenty-two years ago James Damiano began an odyssey that led him into a legal maelstrom with Bob Dylan that

has become a paramount signature of what has become of the United States Judicial System.

As the curtain rises on the stage of deceit, we learn that CBS, used songs and lyrics, for international recording

artist Bob Dylan. Bob Dylan's name is credited to the songs. One of those songs is nominated for a Grammy.

Ironically the title of that song is "Dignity"

Since auditioning for the legendary CBS Record producer John Hammond, Sr., who influenced the careers of

music industry icons Billy Holiday, Bob Dylan, Pete Seger, Bruce Springsteen and Stevie Ray Vaughan, James

has engaged in a multi-million dollar copyright infringement lawsuit with Bob Dylan.

To our knowledge there has been only one article written about this suit and released by the press. The article

was written by Larry Hicks and published in New Jersey's Morris County "Daily Record" on October 3, 1995,

when the headline "Mount Olive composer sues Bob Dylan" appeared on the front page.

Patricia Keil a spokeswoman for Sony commented on the allegations "We don't normally comment on pending

litigation but we know Bob Dylan wrote all of these songs."

It is now six and a half years later and we have this to say:

After thirty-five hours of video taped depositions, and after three and a half million dollars have been spent on

this litigation, defendants Sony Music and or Bob Dylan still to this date September 18th 2002, have never filed a

counter, slander or libel suit against Damiano.

Defendants have been aware of James Damiano's public statements made against Bob Dylan for over ten years..

Defendants also refuse to answer, deny or refute material questions regarding Bob Dylan's solicitation of

Damiano's songs and music. The lawful time allowed for the filing of such motions is well passed.

In 1979, James Damiano met Mikie Harris.

Mikie introduced James to the legendary CBS Record producer John Hammond Sr.

James eventually auditioned for Mr. Hammond with an acoustic guitar.

This is a story of music industry corruption and intrigue, of the "little guy's" daunting struggle against big business

and a legal system that not only failed to work for justice and fair play, but also allowed itself to be manipulated

for unprecedented vengeance.


227 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

In an unbelievable, but true story, we relive Damiano's seductive times with top, music industry artists and agents.

In a chilling chapter of this saga James meets the highly acclaimed and legendary bass player Jaco Pastorius. Jaco

takes a liking and personal interest in James and his music.

Eventually James moved into Jaco's apartment on Jones Street in Greenwich Village and Paul Butterfield came to

stay for a while.

We watch as James intrigues the industry with some of the hottest Rock and Roll tracks ever to be recorded as

Jaco coaches.

After his twenty-five year rise to the top we then suffer with James at the malicious indifference and arrogant

abuse of top industry officials.

Finally we rise with him to fight back in a court system covertly manipulated by powerfully sinister forces yet

James, in the course of the lawsuit establishes "access" through the courts ruling.

Judge Simandle ruled in his December 1995 opinion "Plaintiff has demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact

as to whether defendants had access to his work."

Judge Simandle also ruled "This court will accept as true, Plaintiff's allegation that Sony represented to him that

he would be credited and compensated for his work if Dylan used it."

Even motive for the basis of the lawsuit is established through a 1988 Associated Press article by Kathryn Baker

who interviewed Bob Dylan. Ms. Baker writes " ï¿½he didn't have enough material of his own for an album."

Ms. Baker was deposed however her testimony remains confidential information That is only available to the

court and not to the general public. Bob Dylan filed a motion for all discovery materials to be designated as

confidential and was granted the request by Federal Magistrate Judge, The Honorable Judge Joel B. Rosen and

upheld by Judge Jerome B. Simandle.

Bob Dylan's publicist Elliot Mintz who had been soliciting James Damiano's music for years is present at the

Dylan Baker interview. Mr. Mintz reviewed the article for accuracy before it was submitted to the Associated

Press for final release.

In other words Elliot Mintz who solicited James Damiano's songs was well aware that Bob Dylan (in Ms. Bakers

words) did not have enough songs.

During the course of the investigation Damiano stumbles upon some interesting facts, all of which support his

claims. He learns that the melody line for "Knocking, On Heaven Door" is almost an exact clone of Neil Young's

song "Helpless."

"Knocking of Heavens Door" is released years after "Helpless" was played on the radio.

Again learning that yet another Dylan song "Shelter From The Storm" seems to be another exact melodic clone of

John Foggerty's "Down Around The Corner" which Foggerty released years before Bob Dylan released "Shelter

From The Storm"

As James learns of allegations about "Masters Of War" the melody line written by Jackie Washington.

Please note there is a website on the Internet which has been left uncontested stating that Jackie Washington

wrote the melody line for "Masters of War"


228 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Another songwriter Eric Von Schmidt who personally knew Bob Dylan published his allegations in a book

released by The Cambridge Press" that he wrote "Baby Let Me Follow Down". Von Schmidt also published his

allegations in the Cambridge press.

As the table starts to turn and "Eleven Years" enters the genre of mystery and comedy as the big fifth avenue

corporate machine becomes helpless in defending against the true documented facts.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Damiano learns of allegations that, Steven M. Kramer (the attorney who represented him in this lawsuit ) was

previously employed by Parcher & Hayes.

Parcher & Hayes is the same firm who represented Bob Dylan in this lawsuit.

Judge Jerome B. Simandle ruled:

"Indeed as Defendants themselves profess, plaintiff may exercise his first amendment right to speak about his

claims with whomever he so desires, he is only prohibited from exploiting the discovery materials obtained during

the course of this litigation for publicity, profit or collateral gain.".

"Finally, the limited nature of the 1996 protective orders does not preclude Damiano from publishing his own

version of reality to whomever he chooses, so long as the materials and testimony that came to Damiano under the

discovery process in this case are not themselves disclosed."

James has been associated with the most influential entertainment industry producers, all of his songwriting

career. Besides working with John Hammond Sr. James is the brother-in-law of Richard Frankel a two-time

Pulitzer prize winner and the producer of many award winning Broadway plays including "The Producers."

"The Producers" made history after winning twelve Toni awards, one more Toni than "Hello Dolly."

James has contacted Ben Elliot, Grammy Award winning music producer/engineer for Keith Richards, Eric

Clapton, etc. to produce the his next album.

Based upon his factual experiences documented in the account "11 Years" and leading up to his eventual

copyright infringement suit with Bob Dylan, Sony Music and CBS Records this issue becomes not only the most

compelling stories of generations and the rock and roll genre but it also becomes a paramount signature of what

has become of the United States Judicial System.

Damiano has Dylan beat at every stage of the game, from Dylan not being able to deny the allegations of Dylan's

solicitation of Damiano's songs, to motive and finally to the credentials of the music experts.

Damiano's musicologist graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard.

This E-mail was sent to me from one of the most prominent intellectual property Attorneys in the country: Please

review. Thank You.

RE: James Damiano Vs. Bob Dylan CV 0547 (JBS)

James

Thanks for the disclaimer. I think in general, all you need to show for Copyright infringement is access and

substantial similarity. To avoid summary judgment against you, the plaintiff, there would have to be some dispute

as to any material fact.


229 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

In your case, it would seem that all material facts are in dispute and no judge should grant summary judgment in

favor of Dylan. Further, the moving party has the initial burden of proving that no genuine issue of material fact

exist. So, yeah, it seems like there are a thousand facts in dispute in your case and were I a judge, I'd never award

summary judgment in favor of the other side.

END OF E-MAIL

Exhibit A



CV 95-4795 (JBS

JAMES DAMIANO, Plaintiff

against

SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC and BOB DYLAN Defendants

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT AGAINST BOB DYLAN, MOTION TO RECUSE THE HONORABLE

JUDGE JEROME B. SIMANDLE, MOTION TO REVERSE ALL RULINGS IN THIS LITIGATION, MOTION

TO VACATE PROTECTIVE CONFIDENTIAL ORDERS ENTERED IN THIS LITIGATION , MOTION FOR

ADMISSIONS OF DEFENDANTS BOB DYLAN AND SONY MUSIC INC, MOTION TO REVERSE JUDGE

SIMANDLE'S DISMISSAL

After seven years, fifty hours of video taped depositions, and after three and a half million dollars have been spent

on this litigation there has not been a counter-suit filed by Bob Dylan and or Sony Music Entertainment.

Plaintiff's website declaration containing the enclosed issues of facts cited in this document has been posted on

the world wide internet for six years and nine months and defendants still to this date, March 29th, 2003 have not

contested the issues of fact or the issues of solicitation by defendants of plaintiffs songs cited herein.

Defendants did however filed a motion for contempt against plaintiff for violating Judge Joel B. Rosen's order

designating all discovery as confidential, including expert testimony, and deposition transcripts.

All witness's in this litigation were sworn to tell the truth. The truth is a perfect defense for libel. It is impossible

to exploit the truth.

This court should know that Plaintiff has been counseled by many attorney's and some Judges who believe that

the outcome of this lawsuit so far is unjust and as a matter of law and at the very least the unresolved issues of

facts could have only been decided by a jury.



No unbias facts, no unbias evidence or no unbias testimony exists to support Judge Jerome B. Simandle's decision

to dismiss Plaintiff James Damiano's lawsuit against Bob Dylan for copyright infringement case no 95- 4795

(JBS).


230 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM


___________________________________________________________ James Damiano

____________________________________

CERTIFICATION OF JAMES DAMIANO SEPT 29 2000

Dated September 29, 2000

This motion conclusively refutes the courts decision to enter summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

This motion also conclusively refutes the foundation of defendantï¿½s bias, fabricated, primary defense that

Plaintiff was delusional and documents to the record that Defendants have intentionally made false statements to

this court.

There are issues of facts left unresolved after the courts dismissal.

The decision of Judge Simandle to dismiss this lawsuit is subjective.

This court is attempting to hide from the public, deposition materials which incriminate Bob Dylan.

An Example of this would be Elliot Mintz Bob Dylan's publicist of ten years testified under oath in a video taped

deposition when deposed by Plaintiff's attorney:

"Under the subject of mistruths spoken to your client during the course of these telephone conversations he

would frequently ask me to pass along information, ask questions about Bob or to Bob about him and in fact told

him that I would and that I did ond on those occasions that of course was a mistruth."

Judge Simandle ignored this admission.

The primary Defendant in this litigation ( Bob Dylan ) refuses to take a deposition.

The primary Defendant in this litigation ( Bob Dylan ) never submitted an affidavit of denial or an affidavit

addressing the unresolved issues cited herein.

Plaintiff's Motion for Request for admissions:

Plaintiff stipulates that the facts expressed within this motion will be conclusively deemed as truth within 30 days

of August 3, 2000, should they be left disproved by anyone. At such time said admissions and facts expressed

within this motion will be deemed as truth, entered upon the record of this court and docketed with the clerk.

The fact issues expressed within this motion concerning Defendants eleven year association with Plaintiff and all

fact issues expressed within this motion concerning Defendants solicitation of Plaintiff James Damiano's songs,

will be deemed admitted after thirty days unless defendants deny the forgoing with specificity. pursuant to

FRDCP rule 36.

Dylan since has released Chronicles Volume 1

Dec. 20, 2004 11:26am ET

The Early Show CBS Evening News 48 Hours 60 Minutes (SUN) 60 Minutes (WED) All Broadcasts

Dylan Looks Back


231 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

On Dec. 5, 2004 CBS interviewed Bob Dylan

Dylan Breaks His Silence

Bob Dylan appears on 60 Minutes in his first television interview in nearly 20 years. (Photo: CBS) "I never

wanted to be a prophet or a savior. Elvis maybe. I could see myself becoming him. But prophet? No." Bob Dylan

The music legend talks to Ed Bradley about his career, the press, and his family. (Photo: CBS/60 Minutes)

Chronicles, Volume One (advertisement)

(CBS) There is no living musician who has been more influential than Bob Dylan.

Over a 43-year career, his distinctive twang and poetic lyrics have produced some of the most memorable songs

ever written. In the '60s, his songs of protest and turmoil spoke to an entire generation.

While his life has been the subject of endless interpretation, Dylan has been largely silent. Now, at 63, he has

written a memoir called "Chronicles, Volume One." Correspondent Ed Bradley got to sit down with this music

legend in his first television interview in nearly 20 years.

Dylan is mysterious, elusive, fascinating ï¿½ just like his music.

Over more than four decades, Dylan has produced 500 songs and more than 40 albums. Does he ever look back at

the music he's written with surprise?

"I used to. I don't do that anymore. I don't know how I got to write those songs. Those early songs were almost

magically written," says Dylan, who quotes from his 1964 classic, "It's Alright, Ma."

"Try to sit down and write something like that. There's a magic to that, and it's not Siegfried and Roy kind of

magic, you know? It's a different kind of a penetrating magic. And, you know, I did it. I did it at one time."

(Does he think he can do it again today? No, says Dylan. "You can't do something forever," he says. "I did it once,

and I can do other things now. But, I can't do that."

(Dylan has been writing music since he was a teenager in the remote town of Hibbing, Minn. He was the eldest of

two sons of Abraham and Beatty Zimmerman.

(How was his childhood? "I really didn't consider myself happy or unhappy," says Dylan. "I always knew that

there was something out there that I needed to get to. And it wasn't where I was at that particular moment."

(In his book, Dylan writes that he came alive at 19, when he moved to Greenwich Village in New York City ï¿½

which at the time was the frenetic center of the '60s counterculture. Within months, Dylan had signed a recording

contract with Columbia Records.

("You refer to New York as the capital of the world. But when you told your father that, he thought that it was a

joke," says Bradley. "Did your parents approve of you being a singer-songwriter? Going to New York?"

("No. They wouldn't have wanted that for me. But my parents never went anywhere," says Dylan. "My father

probably thought the capital of the world was wherever he was at the time. It couldn't possibly be anyplace else.

Where he and his wife were in their own home, that, for them, was the capital of the world."

(So what made Dylan different? What pushed him out there?

("I listened to the radio a lot. I hung out in the record stores. And I slam-banged around on the guitar and played

the piano and learned songs from a world which didn't exist around me," says Dylan.


232 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

(He says that he knew even then that he was destined to become a music legend. "I was heading for the fantastic

lights," he writes. "Destiny was looking right at me and nobody else."

(What does the word "destiny" mean to Dylan?

("It's a feeling you have that you know something about yourself - nobody else does - the picture you have in your

mind of what you're about will come true," says Dylan. "It's kind of a thing you kind of have to keep to your own

self, because it's a fragile feeling. And if you put it out there, somebody will kill it. So, itï¿½s best to keep that all

inside."

(When Bradley asked Dylan why he changed his name from Robert Zimmerman, he said that was destiny, too.

"Some people ï¿½ you're born, you know, the wrong names, wrong parents. I mean, that happens," says Dylan.

"You call yourself what you want to call yourself. This is the land of the free."

(Dylan created a world inspired by old folk music, with piercing and poetic lyrics, in songs such as "A Hard

Rainï¿½s A-Gonna Fall." These were songs that reflected the tension and unrest of the civil rights and anti-war

movements of the '60s.

(It was an explosive mixture that turned Dylan, by 25, into a cultural and political icon - playing to sold out

concert halls around the world, and followed by people wherever he went. Dylan was called the voice of his

generation ï¿½ and was actually referred to as a prophet, a messiah.

(Yet Dylan says he saw himself simply as a musician: "You feel like an impostor when someone thinks you're

something and you're not."

(What was the image that people had of him? And what was the reality?

("The image of me was certainly not a songwriter or a singer," says Dylan. "It was more like some kind of a threat

to society in some kind of way."

(What was the toughest part for him personally? "It was like being in an Edgar Allan Poe story. And you're just

not that person everybody thinks you are, though they call you that all the time," says Dylan. "'You're the

prophet. You're the savior.' I never wanted to be a prophet or savior. Elvis maybe. I could easily see myself

becoming him. But prophet? No."

(He may not have seen himself as the voice of the '60s generation, but his songs were viewed as anthems that

sparked a moment.

("My stuff were songs, you know? They weren't sermons," says Dylan. "If you examine the songs, I don't believe

you're gonna find anything in there that says that I'm a spokesman for anybody or anything really."

("But they saw it," says Bradley.

("They must not have heard the songs," says Dylan.

("It's ironic, that the way that people viewed you was just the polar opposite of the way you viewed yourself,"

says Bradley.

("Isn't that something," says Dylan.

(Dylan did almost anything to shatter the lofty image many people had of him. He writes that he intentionally

made bad records, and once poured whiskey over his head in public.


233 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

(He also writes that, as a stunt, he went to Israel and made a point of having his picture taken at the Wailing Wall

wearing a skullcap. When he went to Israel, he writes that the newspapers changed him overnight into a Zionist.

How did this help?

("If the common perception of me out there in the public was that I was either a drunk, or I was a sicko, or a

Zionist, or a Buddhist, or a Catholic, or a Mormon ï¿½ all of this was better than 'Archbishop of Anarchy,'" says

Dylan, referring to being considered the voice of a generation opposed to everything.

(Dylan was especially opposed to the media, which he says were always trying to pin him down. He wrote, "The

press, I figured, you lied to it." Why?

("I realized at the time that the press, the media, they're not the judge - God's the judge," says Dylan. "The only

person you have to think about lying twice to is either yourself or to God. The press isn't either of them. And I

just figured they're irrelevant."

(Dylan tried to run away from all of that. In the mid-'60s, he retreated with his wife and three young children to

Woodstock, N.Y. But even there, he couldnï¿½t escape the legions of fans who descended on his home, begging

for an audience with the legend himself. He says people would actually come to the house, wanting to "discuss

things with me, politics and philosophy and organic farming and things."

(What did Dylan know about organic farming? "Nothing," he says. "Not a thing."

(What did he mean when he wrote that "the funny thing about fame is that nobody believes it's you"?

("People, they'll say, 'Are you who I think you are?' And you'll say, 'I don't know.' Then, they'll say, 'You're him.'

And you'll say, 'OK, you know, that ï¿½ yes,'" says Dylan. "And then, the next thing they'll say, 'Well, no, you

know? Like are you really him? You're not him.' And, you know, that can go on and on."

(He says he doesn't like to eat in restaurants because of all the attention he gets. And he says he has never gotten

use to it.

(At his peak, fame was taking its toll on Dylan. He was heading toward a divorce from his wife, Sara. And in

concerts, he wore white makeup to mask himself. But his songs revealed the pain.

(About his ex-wife, Dylan says: "She was with me back then, through thick and thin, you know? And it just wasn't

the kind of life that she had ever envisioned for herself, any more the than the kind of life that I was living, that I

had envisioned for mine."

(By the mid-1980s, Dylan felt he was burned out and over the hill. And he wrote some pretty harsh words about

himself: "I'm a '60s troubadour, a folk-rock relic. A wordsmith from bygone days. I'm in the bottomless pit of

cultural oblivion."

("I'd seen all these titles written about me," says Dylan. "I believed it, anyway. I wasn't getting any thrill out of

performing. I thought it might be time to close it up. ï¿½ I had thought I'd just put it away for a while. But then I

started thinking, 'That's enough, you know?'"

(But within a few years, Dylan said he had recaptured his creative spark, and went back on the road. He

performed more than 100 concerts a year. And he won three Grammy awards in 1998 for his album, "Time Out

Of Mind."

(At 63, Dylan remains a voice as unique and powerful as any there has ever been in American music.


234 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

(His fellow musicians paid tribute to him when he was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, joining him

in a rousing rendition of his most famous song, "Like a Rolling Stone." That song was recently named by Rolling

Stone magazine as the No. 1 song of all time. And he has 12 other songs on their list of the Top 500.

("That must be good to have as part of your legacy," says Bradley.

("Oh, maybe this week. But you know, the list, they change names, and you know, quite frequently, really. I don't

really pay much attention to that," says Dylan.

("But it's a pat on the back," says Bradley.

("This week it is," Dylan replies. "But who's to say how long that's gonna last?"

(His success, however, has lasted a long time. Dylan is still performing all of his songs on tour, and he says he

doesn't take any of it for granted.

(So why is he still out there?

("It goes back to that destiny thing. I mean, I made a bargain with it, you know, long time ago. And I'm holding up

my end ï¿½ to get where I am now," says Dylan.

(And with whom did he make the bargain? "With the chief commander," says Dylan, laughing. "In this earth and

in the world we can't see."

(Dylan has been nominated this year for the Nobel Prize in literature for his songwriting. His new book has been a

bestseller for the past seven weeks. It was published by Simon & Schuster, which is owned by Viacom, the parent

company of CBS. Dylan is planning to write two more volumes of his memoirs.

(The following article written by Jim Edwards was published in the New Jersey Law Journal on March 27 2003.

The article reveals just how bias the media can be.

(Litigation Like a Rolling Stone A songwriter's copyright infringement suit against Bob Dylan is still in the federal

courts after eight years

(Jim Edwards New Jersey Law Journal 03-27-2003

Fifteen years ago, Bob Dylan met amateur guitarist James Damiano in a dark, rain-soaked parking lot outside a

concert theater in Jones Beach, N.Y. The storied singer had just left the stage and was about to get on his tour bus

when Damiano slipped through an unlocked gate to intercept him, the fan claims.

Damiano handed Dylan's bus driver a package, and was so nervous that he managed to utter only seven words to

the star: "Tony Tiller, Tony Tiller at CBS Records."

Dylan said nothing. The meeting lasted only a few seconds. "Dylan nodded to me, turned around and walked

back to the bus," Damiano says. "The door shut and the bus drove away."

That meeting, the contents of the package and the meaning of Damiano's seven words have since spurred eight

years of litigation in Newark, N.J., federal district court. Damiano claims that the package contained songs he

wrote for Dylan on the recommendation of Tiller, a CBS Records producer, and that Dylan turned those songs

into hits and neither credited nor paid him.

Specifically, Damiano claims that several Dylan songs, including "God Knows," "Disease of Conceit," "Most of

the Time" and "Dignity" -- the latter was on Dylan's Greatest Hits Vol. 3 -- were written by him.


235 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

The most interesting aspect of the case, however, is not the tantalizing notion that Dylan may have stolen some of

his best work -- Judge Jerome Simandle ruled Damiano's claim bogus in 1996, noting that the songs "just don't

sound alike" -- rather, it is the question of why the case is still going on after all this time.

The case has been closed and reopened three times. Almost every ruling on every motion has gone against

Damiano, and his appeal was turned back by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals five years ago. Nonetheless,

Simandle is considering new reconsideration briefs from Damiano and Dylan on whether the litigation should

continue -- the third set of such motions in the life of the case.

In fact, the saga of Damiano v. Sony Music and Bob Dylan, No. 95-4795, is mostly about the ability of a pro se

plaintiff to keep the object of his obsession tied up in court seemingly indefinitely, despite a meritless complaint.

"Every circuit has what they call frequent filers," says Prof. Ira Robbins of American University Washington

College of Law, a former pro se law clerk at the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. "They can bog down the

court."

Paul Thompson, a former Essex County presiding civil judge and now of counsel to Tompkins, McGuire,

Wachenfeld & Barry in Newark, agrees, noting, "Ultimately they go away, but not without a great deal of

difficulty."

BAD COMPANY

Back in 1995, when Damiano filed his initial complaint, it could have been an open-and-shut case. Damiano had

to prove only three things: that Dylan had access to Damiano's songs prior to publishing; that the recorded songs

were similar to Damiano's; and that Damiano's original material was copyrighted.

On its face, the complaint seemed plausible. It listed the similar lyrics of both men. It provided a detailed timeline

of alleged meetings between Damiano and Dylan's associates, including occasions when songs were handed to his

record company. It also contained a transcript of an expert's analysis of Damiano and Dylan's songs, which

concluded that the two are similar.

Indeed, three months after the complaint was filed, Damiano won his claim by default when Dylan failed to

answer. It was a short-lived win. It was also the last. It turned out that neither Sony nor Dylan had been served

with papers; they had no idea they were being sued. The default was quickly overturned.

Failing to serve the defendants was not Damiano's first mistake. That occurred before he even got near the

courthouse. Damiano retained litigation pit bull Steven Kramer of Steven Kramer & Associates in New York to

write the complaint.

In 1991, Kramer's reputation was riding high. He won $239.4 million in an antitrust case, followed the next year

by a $61.5 million verdict in a similar action, two of the largest awards New Jersey had ever seen. He was widely

regarded as an eccentric, intense trial lawyer whom juries loved and judges hated.

Those awards did not withstand post-trial scrutiny, however, and by the time Damiano retained him, Kramer's

victories had crumbled in a series of disciplinary actions, appeals and fee disputes.

It was only in 2002 that the true extent of Kramer's eccentricities became apparent, when he was finally disbarred

by the state supreme court after 38 instances of professional misconduct across various jurisdictions. That

misconduct included the hiring of a private detective to "investigate" Chief Judge John Bissell, who was presiding

over one of Kramer's cases, in hopes of finding material that could be used to blackmail him. Back in 1995,

however, Kramer's problems had not fully bloomed.


236 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Once Dylan was served, his lawyers filed a summary judgment motion.

Looking for a genuine issue of material fact, Simandle could not find one. The songs did not sound similar and

the evidence indicated it was Damiano's songs that were probably stolen from Dylan, not the other way around,

wrote the Camden-based judge. Even if they were not stolen, the judge continued, Damiano certainly had created

them for the sole purpose of filing suit.

"Plaintiff's complaint, consisting of various snippets of various origin that are rearranged and stitched together

under made-for-litigation titles, is a cut-and-paste job," the judge said. Damiano's songs had not even been

copyrighted -- the very first hurdle a plaintiff has to cross in a copyright infringement suit.

The entire claim was a fraud, Simandle ruled.

But Damiano was undeterred. He had already engaged the defense in a year of discovery proceedings, including

the deposition of several witnesses -- two of whom gave credence to Damiano's alleged meeting with Dylan in the

parking lot -- and garnered some personal letters and other correspondence.

So Kramer filed for a motion of reconsideration. Between the filing and ruling, however, Kramer's misdeeds in

other cases caught up with him and he was suspended from the practice of law. In 1997, Simandle again ruled in

favor of Dylan, dismissing the reconsideration motion.

ENLISTING THE PRESS

At this stage, most plaintiffs would realize that they had lost. But Damiano, now working pro se, began to exhibit

the kind of magical thinking common to obsessive pro se litigants. Specifically, he believed that Kramer's

discovery had provided proof of his case.

In particular, Kramer had managed to depose a former Associated Press reporter who had taped an interview with

Dylan upon the release of "Down in the Groove," Dylan's 1988 album on which he sung other people's songs. The

reporter, Kathryn Baker, had asked Dylan in the interview why he had composed so little original material.

Dylan replied, "There's no rule that claims that anyone must write their own songs." Dylan went on to tell Baker

he did not have enough material for an album of his own work, and that his songwriting ability was not what it

used to be.

"In the old days, I could get to it real quick," Dylan said. "I can't get to it like that no more. It's not that simple."

Damiano regarded that exchange as a smoking gun, indicating Dylan's motive for stealing his songs: In the same

year Dylan admitted he had writer's block, he was handed Damiano's package at Jones Beach. Even Dylan's bus

driver said in a separate deposition that he had received a package from Damiano.

At this time, Damiano had come to believe that Dylan and Simandle were conspiring against him. The judge had

not allowed Damiano to depose Dylan, after all. In his pleadings, Damiano regards himself as "the little guy"

locked in a "daunting struggle against big business and [the] legal system, [which is] covertly manipulated by

powerfully sinister forces."

An obsessive pro se "will come to court believing firmly that he or she has been wronged," says Robbins, the

former 2nd Circuit clerk. "It's a real problem when the litigant doesn't know even the rudiments of judicial

process."

Clark Alpert of West Orange's Alpert, Butler, Sanders, Norton & Bearg, who has made dealing with insistent,

unlawyered litigants something of a specialty, agrees: "Pro se's will kind of do or say anything," he notes.


237 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Damiano did not respond to repeated attempts to reach him by telephone and e-mail to addresses listed on his

Web sites. The various addresses given for him in the pleadings appear without telephone numbers, or are out of

date. Calls made to people with the same name in the towns he lists as home were unsuccessful -- there was no

answer, the people answering said they were not James Damiano or messages were not returned.

Believing that the suit was over, Dylan's attorney, Orin Snyder of Parcher, Hayes & Snyder in New York, decided

to recoup the singer's legal costs. He filed motions demanding fees and contempt fines.

As far back as 1996, Snyder had found Damiano trying to sell Dylan mementoes obtained through discovery in

Rolling Stone magazine's classifieds section. Damiano also had sent a manuscript to The New Yorker and the

tabloid TV show "A Current Affair." Snyder also found that Damiano and an acquaintance had agreed to attempt

to sell the movie rights to Damiano's saga.

"He was going to use the information he got for financial gain," Snyder says.

Snyder obtained a protective order rendering all discovery confidential, but Damiano repeatedly offered items for

sale or posted copies on the Internet. By August 2000, Simandle had found Damiano in contempt of two of his

confidentiality orders and had ordered he pay costs and Snyder's legal bills -- $14,000.

Rather than pay the bill, Damiano went back to where he started. Two weeks after the fines were levied, he filed

another motion for "reconsideration" of the 1996 order, the first substantive ruling in the case. In November 2000,

Simandle denied the motion.

OBSESSION UNBROKEN

Damiano then disappeared from the court's docket for two years. Snyder, Dylan and Simandle could have been

forgiven for thinking they would never hear from him again. But last December, Damiano filed yet another

reconsideration motion.

Unlike the papers filed by Kramer, which bore the appearance of regular pleadings, Damiano's motions provide a

nonlegal look inside the plaintiff's mind. It's a disconcerting landscape: The motions, which are hundreds of pages

long, start off in similar form to those a lawyer might file. But after the first page they quickly devolve into the

story of his life, copies of correspondence between him and various music industry figures, news clippings about

unrelated pop stars and their achievements, and long lists of pretty much everything Damiano knows about Dylan.

"He keeps on filing motions," says Snyder.

Damiano has also started a letter-writing campaign.

Snyder says Mary Jo White, former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York and now a partner at

Debevoise & Plimpton there, received Damiano's e-mails, which claim that Snyder lied in an unrelated copyright

case in which he defended Mariah Carey. White's current office confirms she received the e-mail.

Former Gov. Christine Todd Whitman also received a letter, according to Snyder's deposition of Damiano.

"He's writing to everyone, anyone he knows who has a relationship to me," Snyder says.

Hateful letter writing is common to an obsessive pro se, according to Bettina Plevan, a partner at Proskauer Rose

in New York. "It's particularly disconcerting, I find, to junior lawyers who have not perhaps experienced it

before," she says. Plevan should know. In the late 1980s she defended Chase Manhattan in a sexual harassment

suit brought pro se by former bank employee Carolee Koster. When the judge finally ruled against Koster after

years of litigation, Koster's father hunted the judge down and shot him to death.


238 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

No one is suggesting that the Damiano case is heading in that direction. Snyder says he has asked the judge to

enjoin Damiano from continuing to file -- a common remedy for vexatious litigants -- but Simandle's recent

correspondence with the parties does not indicate that will happen.

Damiano's last motion reads, "[Now] is as good a time as any to review the facts. ... After six and a half years [sic],

thirty five hours of videotaped depositions, and after three and a half million dollars have been spent on this

litigation there has not been a counter-suit slander or libel suit filed by Bob Dylan."

The pages also accuse Simandle of partiality and demand his recusal. Damiano seems to believe that because

Snyder did not contest certain Web sites Damiano created about Dylan that his allegations must therefore be true.

"This litigation is so over," Snyder says.

Fat man lookin' in a blade of steel Thin man lookin' at his last meal Hollow man lookin' in a cottonfield For

dignity

Fat man lookin' in a blade of steel Thin man lookin' at his last meal Hollow man lookin' in a cottonfield For

dignity

Wise man lookin' in a blade of grass Young man lookin' in the shadows that pass Poor man lookin' through

painted glass For dignity

Somebody got murdered on New Year's Eve Somebody said dignity was the first to leave I went into the city,

went into the town Went into the land of the midnight sun

Searchin' high, searchin' low Searchin' everywhere I know Askin' the cops wherever I go Have you seen dignity?

Blind man breakin' out of a trance Puts both his hands in the pockets of chance Hopin' to find one circumstance

Of dignity

I went to the wedding of Mary-lou She said ï¿½I don't want nobody see me talkin' to youï¿½ Said she could get

killed if she told me what she knew About dignity

I went down where the vultures feed I would've got deeper, but there wasn't any need Heard the tongues of angels

and the tongues of men Wasn't any difference to me

Chilly wind sharp as a razor blade House on fire, debts unpaid Gonna stand at the window, gonna ask the maid

Have you seen dignity?

Drinkin' man listens to the voice he hears In a crowded room full of covered up mirrors Lookin' into the lost

forgotten years For dignity

Met Prince Phillip at the home of the blues Said he'd give me information if his name wasn't used He wanted

money up front, said he was abused By dignity

Footprints runnin' cross the silver sand Steps goin' down into tattoo land I met the sons of darkness and the sons

of light In the bordertowns of despair

Got no place to fade, got no coat I'm on the rollin' river in a jerkin' boat Tryin' to read a note somebody wrote

About dignity

Sick man lookin' for the doctor's cure Lookin' at his hands for the lines that were And into every masterpiece of

literature for dignity


239 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Englishman stranded in the blackheart wind Combin' his hair back, his future looks thin Bites the bullet and he

looks within For dignity

Someone showed me a picture and I just laughed Dignity never been photographed I went into the red, went into

the black Into the valley of dry bone dreams

So many roads, so much at stake So many dead ends, I'm at the edge of the lake Sometimes I wonder what it's

gonna take To find dignity

Wise man lookin' in a blade of grass Young man lookin' in the shadows that pass Poor man lookin' through

painted glass For dignity

Somebody got murdered on New Year's Eve Somebody said dignity was the first to leave I went into the city,

went into the town Went into the land of the midnight sun

Searchin' high, searchin' low Searchin' everywhere I know Askin' the cops wherever I go Have you seen dignity?

Blind man breakin' out of a trance Puts both his hands in the pockets of chance Hopin' to find one circumstance

Of dignity

I went to the wedding of Mary-lou She said "I don't want nobody see me talkin' to you" "Said she could get killed

if she told me what she knew About dignity"

I went down where the vultures feed I would've got deeper, but there wasn't any need Heard the tongues of angels

and the tongues of men Wasn't any difference to me

Chilly wind sharp as a razor blade House on fire, debts unpaid Gonna stand at the window, gonna ask the maid

Have you seen dignity?

Drinkin' man listens to the voice he hears In a crowded room full of covered up mirrors Lookin' into the lost

forgotten years For dignity

Met Prince Phillip at the home of the blues Said he'd give me information if his name wasn't used He wanted

money up front, said he was abused By dignity

Footprints runnin' cross the silver sand Steps goin' down into tattoo land I met the sons of darkness and the sons

of light In the bordertowns of despair

Got no place to fade, got no coat I'm on the rollin' river in a jerkin' boat Tryin' to read a note somebody wrote

About dignity

Sick man lookin' for the doctor's cure Lookin' at his hands for the lines that were And into every masterpiece of

literature for dignity

Englishman stranded in the blackheart wind Combin' his hair back, his future looks thin Bites the bullet and he

looks within For dignity

Someone showed me a picture and I just laughed Dignity never been photographed I went into the red, went into

the black Into the valley of dry bone dreams

So many roads, so much at stake So many dead ends, I'm at the edge of the lake Sometimes I wonder what it's

gonna take To find dignity [email protected]


240 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

A paramount signature of what has become of the United States Judicial System

Lead attorney for Bob Dylan Orin Snyder has committed an abundance of fraud in this litigation. Orin

Snyder has also been accused in the Carey Selletti lawsuit of falsifying information and lying to the court.

Plaintiff has produced evidence to Judge Simandle of Mr. Snyders ethics violations. Judge Simandle has up to this

date disregarded this information

Few artists can lay claim to the controversy that has surrounded the career of songwriter James Damiano.

Twenty-two years ago James Damiano began an odyssey that led him into a legal maelstrom with Bob Dylan that,

to this day, fascinates the greatest of intellectual minds.

As the curtain rises on the stage of deceit we learn that CBS used songs and

lyrics for international recording artist, Bob Dylan. Bob Dylan's name is credited to the songs. One of those songs

is nominated for a Grammy as best rock song of the year. Ironically the title of that song is Dignity.

Since auditioning for the legendary CBS Record producer John Hammond, Sr., who influenced the careers of

music industry icons Billy Holiday, Bob Dylan, Pete Seger, Bruce Springsteen and Stevie Ray Vaughan, James

has engaged in a multimillion dollar copyright infringement law suit with Bob Dylan.

Plaintiff's music analysis in this litigation was prepared by Dr. Paul Greene who graduated magna cum laude from

Harvard University. The expert comparative music analysis of James Damiano's song "Steel Guitars" and Bob

Dylan's song "Dignity" prepared by Dr. Greene who graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University has

been ordered confidential by The Honorable Judge Joel B Rosen and enforced by Judge Jerome B. Simandle

It is uncontested by Bob Dylan and or Bob Dylan's law firms Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, Parcher Hayes & Snyder,

and Gibson Dunn & Crutcher that Bob Dylan and hecker Brown and Sherry that people in Bob Dylan's

entourage have solicited James Damiano's songs and music for over ten years and eleven months.

James Damiano pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1746, declares under penalty of perjury that:

1979

Years ago I read an unauthorized biography about Bob Dylan, in which the author made reference to a man who

at one time was considered to be the president of CBS Records. His name was John Hammond, Sr. He was family

to the Vanderbilts, Attended Yale law school, the most sought after record producer in the United States, and had

signed Pete Seeger to Columbia Records 1960.

In fact John Hammond Sr. was and probably will always be considered the most influential music executive in the

world by music industry professionals.

After years of working in the music industry, Mr. Hammond established himself as a legend and accomplished a

reputation as having the best ears in the business by signing a fascinating number of legendary artists to the record

world.

Billy Holiday, Count Basie, Charlie Christian, Duke Ellington, Aretha Franklin, George Benson, Bob Dylan,

Bruce Springsteen along with many other artists including Stevie Ray Vaughan were John Hammond affiliates.


241 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Bob Dylan and John Hammond Sr.

Inspired by the book I read, I decided to take a long shot and called CBS Records on the phone. The operator

answered and I asked to be put through to John Hammond's office. The receptionist rang his office and a woman

named Mikie Harris answered the phone.

Mikie Harris

Mikie Harris I told Mikie that I was a lyricist and asked her if she had a few seconds to listen to one lyric. She

replied yes by saying "Shoot." I then recited a lyric to her that I had recently written and said "the lyric is: Just

think how beautiful you'd feel if you knew your love was real." Within a few seconds I could tell Mikie liked the

lyric.

I in turn did not want to push to hard on the first phone call fearing that I might put her behind schedule, so I

tried to inch my way out of the conversation politely while trying not to show my emotions but before the

conversation ended between Mikie and me, she made it explicit that she wanted me to call again. She repeatedly

told me to feel free to call her there at the office. So began a relationship where we would converse through

actual meetings or correspond over the phone, that lasted close to seven and a half years.

Mikie told me that her name would be appearing in the credits on Stevie Ray Vaughan's album that was released

in 1983. When the album was released it listed John Hammond Sr. As Executive producer and Mikie Harris as

Production Assistant.

Stevie Ray Vaughan later recorded on Bob Dylan's "Under the Red Sky" album, released in 1990.

On June 6th 1987 Mikie wrote a letter to me stating ;

Mikie Harris is given production credits as Assistant to Producer John Hammond.

Stevie Ray Vaughan played on Bob Dylan's album "Under the Red Sky." In fact, numerous musicians that played

on the "Bob Dylan Unplugged" album also shared similar credits on Stevie Ray Vaughan albums.

Mikie Harris is given production credits as Assistant to Producer John Hammond on Stevie Ray Vaughan's album.

When I (James Damiano ) received the June 15th, 1987 letter from Mikie Harris stating that she could not be of

assistance to me, I called her at CBS and asked to speak to her. A man answered the phone and told me that

Mikie was at the hospital with Mr. Hammond. His name was Tony Tiller and he said that he was watching over

the office while Mikie was out.

Mr. Tiller then asked me if I was the person who wrote the material on Mr. Hammond' s desk. I asked him what

material he was referring to and he replied the songs in the big black notebook. I replied yes and we started to

converse about the songs. He told me that he liked them and invited me up to CBS to meet with him. Tony

showed a great deal of enthusiasm for my material. We started meeting or corresponding over the phone as Mikie

and I had and Anthony started inviting me to parties in New York that other CBS people would attend.


242 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

On August 31st 1988 I (James Damiano) received the following letter from CBS

Nick Kuntz has recently written the following statement:

To Whom It May Concern:

It is my belief and opinion that in the matter of the law suit James Damiano vs. Sony Music and Bob Dylan that

defendants' attorney Orin Snyder did misrepresent and misconstrue my deposition testimony to the court. In that

action, Mr. Snyder made false accusations that James Damiano and I attempted to perpetrate against Mr. Dylan

and Sony Music claims that were without merit for personal gain. In reality, nothing could be further from the

truth and that characterization is and has been disingenuous from what our intentions and actions were, at that

time. In addition, it is my further opinion that Steven Kramer, who had personal experience and knowledge of

what our genuine intentions and actions were, at that time, did assist Mr. Snyder's in his intentions to obviscate

the truth of the matter by not arguing to the contrary.


243 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Nick Kuntz

908-456-1641

This website, the book and manuscript "Eleven Years" and the movie "dignity" of which was based upon the

manuscript "Eleven Years" is protect under copyright law and copyrighted under James Damiano's name through

the Library of Congress.

All rights are reserved. Permission to use any or all of this material must be addressed to the publisher at

[email protected]

The video taped depositions of Brad Wright, Tony Tiller Katheryn Baker Elliot Mintz, Mohammad Marhoumy,

and Pam Damiano, have been removed from this website as per order of Judge Jerome B. Simandle and Judge Joel

B. Rosen. All deposition materials have been designated confidential by the order of the Judge and magistrate.

All discovery is complete except for Bob Dylan's deposition.

It has been estimated that Bob Dylan and sony Music made over 70 million dollars on songs written by James

Damiano and released by Bob Dylan.

"Dignity" alone was the hit on Bob Dylan's Greatest Hits Volume 3 CD, and cassette tape. Dignity was also the hit

on Bob Dylan's MTV unplugged video tape, DVD and the unplugged soundtrack CD.

Dignity was also the title track for Bob Dylan's release of "Dignity" in Europe

Please note

That Bob Dylan was subpoened to court and never showed.

Click link below for language translator

StatCounter - Free Web Tracker and Counter

James Damiano & The Freedom of Speech Band

James Damiano vs Bob Dylan litigation update link

Sponsored by

Name: Nlt Law Journal review

Email: [email protected]

Gibson Dunn & Crutcher take on high profile Bob Dylan defense with no defense.

On or about, December 18, 2003 Parcher Hayes & Snyder ( The firm representing Bob Dylan in this action)


244 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

merged and or (changed their name) to Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP.

We suspect that with the growth of the internet and given all the fraud that Parcher Hayes & Snyder committed

during the Damiano Dylan litigation it was a calculated maneuver and in their best interest to change the name of

the law firm.

This Parcher Hayes & Snyder "name change" seemed odd given the fact that the Parcher Hayes & Snyderï¿½s law

firm was identified as one of the "premier boutique entertainment firms", a description that took an enormous

amount of time and effort to accomplish.

So why after all of this would "Parcher Hayes & Snyder" dissolve It's name?

After extensive research we believe that Orin Snyder and Peter Parcher miscalculated the growth, and

development of the internet and that Peter Parcher and Orin Snyder's legal advice given to Bob Dylan during this

litigation has ruined Bob Dylan's reputation.

On December 18, 2003 the following article was reported by the New York Law Journal

Manatt Fortifies Its Media Group With Acquisition

By Anthony Lin

New York Law Journal

Thursday, December 18, 2003

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips has acquired the 12-lawyer New York firm of Parcher, Hayes & Snyder, a litigation

boutique heavily focused on the entertainment industry.

The move gives Los Angeles-based Manatt prominent entertainment practices on both coasts.

Clients of the Parcher firm include rock stars such as Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen and Paul Simon. Manatt's

Los Angeles entertainment practice counts actors Michael Douglas and Robin Williams among its clients. Both

firms also represent media companies and studios such as Time Warner, Sony and DreamWorks.

Paul H. Irving, managing partner of Manatt, said Wednesday the firm was on its way to "becoming one of a

handful, if not the dominant, entertainment and media law firms in the country."

The 290-lawyer firm will now have between 40 and 50 lawyers working in entertainment, media and advertising

practices, he said.

Parcher Hayes partners Peter Parcher, Steven Hayes, Orin Snyder, Cynthia Arato and Gregory Clarick will

become partners at Manatt. Three counsel and four associates will also join Manatt from Parcher Hayes. Snyder

will join Manatt's board of directors.

Parcher said Wednesday his firm had joined forces with Manatt in order to serve clients in areas other than

litigation.

"We're trial lawyers," he said. "Now many, many cases are filed in California and many of our clients have

interests that go far beyond the courtroom."

Manatt's already strong focus on the entertainment and media industries made it the natural platform for Parcher

Hayes to grow, he said.


245 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

The addition of the Parcher Hayes lawyers will increase the size of Manatt's New York office to 65 lawyers. At

the beginning of last month, Manatt brought aboard 10 lawyers, including name partners Linda Golstein and

Felix Kent, from the advertising group of New York's Hall Dickler Kent Goldstein & Wood.

Snyder said Manatt's addition of Goldstein's "top-notch" advertising promotion practice had been a strong impetus

to the Parcher Hayes lawyers, given the increasing integration of entertainment and advertising.

"This puts us on the map overnight as an elite firm in the field of media and advertising," he said. "This makes us a

magnet for clients who need help in those areas."

Beyond the creation of a bicoastal entertainment and media group, Irving said the acquisition will form the basis

of an expanded East Coast litigation practice headed by Snyder.

Manatt first entered the New York market in February with its acquisition of Kalkines, Arky, Zall & Bernstein, a

42-lawyer firm specializing in the health care industry.

May we reiterate that after extensive research we believe that Orin Snyder and Peter Parcher miscalculated the

growth, existence, and development of the internet and that Peter Parcher and Orin Snyder's legal advice given to

Bob Dylan during this litigation has ruined Bob Dylan's reputation.

Parcher and Hayes may have earned the benefit of the doubt but here's the kicker.

Orin Snyder has now taken what we believe to be the most high profile case in the federal court to Gibson Dunn

& Crutcher but only after docking it at Manatt Phellps & Phillipps for fifteen months.

On 17-Mar-2005 it was reported

Section: Breaking News

Date: 17-Mar-2005

Author: 32116 Source: The Lawyer

Gibson Dunn bolsters media team with NY raid

Gibson Dunn & Crutcher's New York office is ramping up its media and entertainment presence with the hire of a

five-lawyer team from Manatt Phelps & Phillips.

The former head of Manatt's New York litigation group, Orin Snyder, has quit the firm to join Gibson Dunn,

taking with him a group of four associates. The team focuses on intellectual property and commercial litigation

with an emphasis on media and entertainment disputes and white collar defence.

Snyder counts among his clients Time Warner, Sony BMG Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group, Atlantic

Records, Bob Dylan, Julie Andrews and Ozzy and Sharon Osbourne. He reported to Los Angeles-based litigation

co-chairs Barry Landsberg and Craig de Recat, both of whom remain with the firm.

One must ask why, would Bob Dylan leave his attorneys "Peter Parcher" and "Steven Hayes" after they were his

lawyers for many years.

The answer my friend is not blowin in the wind the answer may just be the question "why would Bob Dylan leave

Parcher & Hayes to let Orin Snyder represent him after Orin Snyder ruined Dylan's reputation?"


246 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Trouble must have stirred at the offices of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips formerly (Parcher Hayes & Snyder) in order

for Orin Snyder to quit the firm.

Orin Snyder

Untill we are officially notified by Orin Snyder whether he still represents Bob Dylan in this litigation we feel that

it is safe to report what we have reported concerning Bob Dylan's legal representation on this website.

As of today August 6, 2005 we have not been notified by Mr. Snyder. This is the same tactic Dylan attorneys

used when Plaintiff James Damiano asked Sony house counsel and Dylan's prior attorneys the question "who

represents Bob Dylan?" explaining to them that he wanted to file a copyright infringement law suit against Bob

Dylan.

It took Sony house counsel and Dylan's previous attorneys over a year to answer James Damiano.

It has been published in the media that the integrity of the United States Federal Judicial System has diminished

to the level that it is unable to adjudicate a simple copyright infringement lawsuit. This motion not only supports

that allegation it conclusively documents, to the record the validity of said statement.

Our comments about Zimmerman, Rosenfeld, Gersh & Leeds LLP. will soon be posted.

Click here to start typing your text

Robert Church an attorney who played the guitar represented James Damiano on Mr. Damiano's appeal. Mr. Church played on the song

Digntiy years before Dylan ever released it.

Robert attained employment at a law firm in North Carolina which would not allow him to have any outside cases so he had to withdraw

from the Damiano Dylan litigation.

See Roberts motion to the court below.


247 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Robert Church Esq.



-------------------------------

:

JAMES DAMIANO :

:

Plaintiff, : 95 CV 4795 (JBS)

:

v. :

: ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED

SONY BMG MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT, as :

successor to SONY MUSIC :

ENTERTAINMENTINC., and BOB DYLAN, :

:

Defendants, :

:

-------------------------------

MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION

TO HOLD PLAINTIFF JAMES DAMIANO IN CONTEMPT

David J. Foley, Esq.

Attorney for Plaintiff

274 Main St.

Keansburg, NJ 07734

732-495-6500

Robert D. Church, Esq

Pro Hac Vice Pending

135 Briarwood Pl

Wake Forest, NC 27587

919-554-3088

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Background

This Court has published four (4) opinions respecting James Damiano’s copyright infringement claims against

Bob Dylan. Mr. Damiano is now brought before the Court on a contempt motion for the offensive manner in which

he publishes his opinions about his case on the internet. In support of this motion, Defendants’ attach

photographic images of video-taped testimony from Defendant’s publicist, Mr. Damiano’s wife and other

deponents in the case.

The Damiano case history is amply set forth in this Court’s last published opinion finding Mr. Damiano in contempt

for violating the protective order. See Damiano v. Sony Music Entertainment, 2000 WL 1689081 (D.N.J. 2000).

While Mr. Damiano clearly violates the confidentiality order by publishing depositions on the internet, the Court

must consider balancing the interests set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court under the First Amendment before

further finding Mr. Damiano contempt. See Bridges v. California, 314 U.S. 252 (1941)(subjecting a contempt

order to review under the First Amendment).

I.

Damiano’s Cause for Publishing Information from His Case Overrides Defendant’s Interest in Sanctioning the

Speech.


248 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

This Court weighed competing considerations for and against entry of a confidentiality order in this case before

the claims where adjudicated. Damiano v. Sony Music Entertainment and Bob Dylan , 168 F.R.D. 485 (D.N.J.

1996). Given the change in circumstance over ten years and the final adjudication of the claims dismissed on

summary judgment in 1996, considerations weigh in favor of lifting the confidentiality order.

A.

The Confidentiality Order is Overbroad for Not Allowing Damiano to Publish Even His Own Deposition

Despite this Court’s prior findings of contempt against Mr. Damiano, this Court should evaluate the instant motion

by asking whether the information published by Mr. Damiano on this occasion causes harm sufficient to support a

contempt citation. The Court must determine whether its secrecy order “[furthers] an important or substantial

governmental interest unrelated to the suppression of expression.'” Gentile v. State Bar of Nevada 501 U.S.

1030, 1054 (1991)(quoting Seattle Times v. Rhinehart, 467 U.S. 20, 30 (1984)).

This Court found a need for continuing the injunction against Mr. Damiano’s web publications in its published

2000 contempt decision. The interest weighing against Mr. Damiano’s publication was stated as follows:

“Furthermore, plaintiff's sole purpose for gaining access to the commercially sensitive information about Sony and

Dylan, including the organization of their business, profit and royalty information, and private financial data, in

addition to the creative process of Dylan, was to inflict harm on defendants by embarrassing them and exposing

confidential business information. Exposure of Sony and Dylan's business practices could threaten their

competitiveness and financial position within the recording industry. See Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., 785 F.

2d 1108, 1121 (3d Cir. 1986.” Damiano v. Sony Music Entertainment, 2000 WL 1689081 (D.N.J. 2000)

As a prior restraint, this Court’s Protective Order needs to demonstrate an ongoing rational basis to sanction

speech. See Anderson v. Cryovac, 805 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1986). In Gentile v.State Bar of Nevada, the Supreme

Court discussed the balancing test for evaluating a prior restraint on speech in connection with the Nevada Rules

of Professional Conduct. Without questioning the validity of Nevada’s disciplinary rules, Justice Kennedy points

out how a valid rule may become invalid under the First Amendment by its application to particular speech. He

states:

Neither the disciplinary board nor the reviewing court explains any sense in which petitioner's statements had a

substantial likelihood of causing material prejudice. The only evidence against Gentile was the videotape of his

statements and his own testimony at the disciplinary hearing. The Bar's whole case rests on the fact of the

statements, the time they were made, and petitioner's own justifications. Full deference to these factual findings

does not justify abdication of our responsibility to determine whether petitioner's statements can be punished

consistent with First Amendment standards.

Rather, this Court is

‘compelled to examine for [itself] the statements in issue and the circumstances under which they were made to

see whether or not they do carry a threat of clear and present danger to the impartiality and good order of the

courts or whether they are of a character which the principles of the First Amendment, as adopted by the Due

Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, protect.’

'Whenever the fundamental rights of free speech . . . are alleged to have been invaded, it must remain open to a

defendant to present the issue whether there actually did exist at the time a clear danger; whether the danger, if

any, was imminent; and whether the evil apprehended was one so substantial as to justify the stringent restriction

interposed by the legislature.'" Gentile v. State Bar of Nevada, 501 U.S. 1030, 1038-1039 (1991)(citations

omitted).

The confidentiality order entered in Mr. Damiano’s case should be modified to address the specific concerns

expressed by the Court in its opinion and order entered in 2000. Those concerns are clear: protect the

proprietary and privacy interests of Dylan and Sony. The testimony gathered from the case applicable to those

concerns is not clear. Defendants’ motion for contempt does not discriminate between deposition testimony

which touches upon the Court’s concern and testimony which does not. By failing to make this distinction,

Defendants’ leave the court with an order that may be constitutionally overbroad.

The protective order entered by Judge Rosen while the case was proceeding was designed to address concerns

related to the litigation at the time. The Court said:

“if the plaintiff were allowed to commercially exploit discovery materials (i.e. deposition transcripts) through the

media before any issues have been decided, it would constitute an unfair and highly prejudiced disadvantage to

the defendants. Any public access to allegations concerning a celebrity may jeopardize a fair hearing if the case

were to go to trial. Moreover, if the court were to protect all discovery motions from the public, each litigant would

still have equal access to these documents, and neither party would have an advantage over the other.” Damiano

v. Sony Music Entertainment, 168 F.R.D. 485, 492 (D.N.J. 1996)(emphasis added).

Given these considerations, Judge Rosen entered a confidentiality order that is so broad that Mr. Damiano is


249 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

prohibited from publishing even his own deposition. The opinion and order states:

“This court finds that after weighing both arguments in light of the good cause balancing test, modification of the

original protective order is appropriate and the defendant's motion to designate discovery materials as

confidential shall be granted.” Damiano v. Sony Music Entertainment, 168 F.R.D. 485, 493 (D.N.J. 1996)(the

order specifically says “all discovery materials”) .

In Butterworth v. Smith, the Supreme Court found a state prohibition against a witness publishing his testimony

before a grand jury to be a violation of the First Amendment. Butterworth v. Smith 494 U.S. 624 (1990). The Court

reviewed the statute under a heightened scrutiny given that the information had not been obtained as a direct

result of the discovery process. Distinguishing Rhinehart the Court stated the following:

“In Rhinehart we held that a protective order prohibiting a newspaper from publishing information which it had

obtained through discovery procedures did not offend the First Amendment. Here, by contrast, we deal only with

respondent's right to divulge information of which he was in possession before he testified before the grand jury,

and not information which he may have obtained as a result of his participation in the proceedings of the grand

jury. In such cases, where a person ‘lawfully obtains truthful information about a matter of public significance,’ we

have held that ‘state officials may not constitutionally punish publication of the information, absent a need to

further a state interest of the highest order.’” Butterworth v. Smith 494 U.S. 624, 632-633 (1990)(citations

omitted)

The Supreme Court found that the reporter who testified in Butterworth could not be precluded from publishing

his testimony after the grand jury proceeding ended. Mr. Damiano would appear to have no lesser right under

the First Amendment to publish his testimony upon the conclusion of his case. However, the order entered by

Judge Rosen does not accommodate this right.

Given that Mr. Damiano appears to have the right to publish his own deposition and the depositions of witnesses

who likewise give consent, this Court should modify the protective order to only cover information that

Defendants’ show to reach the language of this Court’s 2000 Opinion and Order. Mr. Damiano disputes

Defendants’ claim that the entire deposition testimony of Dylan and Sony witnesses is proprietary. Mr. Damiano

feels compelled by his conscience to publicly criticize Dylan’s claim the suit was “fraudulent.” He also wants public

recognition that Dylan copied his material notwithstanding this Court’s ruling that the copying could not have

reached the threshold of originality to support a copyright infringement claim. See Damiano v. Sony Music

Entertainment, 975 F.Supp. 623, 630 (D.N.J. 1996). Insofar as Mr. Damiano uses deposition material to claim his

influence on Dylan, the Court should allow the information to be published so long as the material does not

disclose proprietary information. We hope the Court will review all the testimony published by Mr. Damiano in the

context of modifying the order to allow Mr. Damiano to publicize portions of testimony which do not touch upon the

concerns expressed in the Court’s prior contempt ruling.

B.

Damiano Can Show Good Cause to Support a Modification of the Confidentiality Order

The District Court has continuing jurisdiction to modify the confidentiality order in this case. See Public Citizen v.

Liggett Group, 858 F.2d 775, 782 (1st Cir. 1988). In the Third Circuit, the Court must evaluate a motion to modify

a confidentially order by applying a “good cause” analysis. See Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., 785 F.2d 1108

(3d Cir. 1986). The “good cause” test required to prevent disclosure is said to be as follows:

"Good cause is established on a showing that disclosure will work a clearly defined and serious injury to the party

seeking closure. The injury must be shown with specificity. Broad allegations of harm, unsubstantiated by specific

examples or articulated reasoning, do not support a good cause showing.’ Id. (citation and internal quotation

marks omitted). The good cause determination must also balance the public's interest in the information against

the injuries that disclosure would cause.” United States v. Wecht, 2007 U.S. App. Lexis 8389 (3rd Cir. 2007)

(quoting Pansy).

Damiano’s interest in providing truthful information about his lawsuit against Bob Dylan should be sufficient “good

cause” to publish the excerpts from depositions he considers important to the public. The Court may disagree

with Mr. Damiano as to the significance of the deposition testimony he publishes. However, the desire for one to

publish truthful information should factor into the consideration as to whether publication of the information

outweighs the public interest served by keeping the testimony a secret. The Supreme Court recognized this very

point in Butterworth:

Against the state interests which we have just evaluated must be placed the impact of Florida's prohibition on

respondent's ability to make a truthful public statement. The effect is dramatic: before he is called to testify in

front of the grand jury, respondent is possessed of information on matters of admitted public concern about which

he was free to speak at will. After giving his testimony, respondent believes he is no longer free to communicate

this information since it relates to the "content, gist, or import" of his testimony. The ban extends not merely to

the life of the grand jury but into the indefinite future. The potential for abuse of the Florida prohibition, through

its employment as a device to silence those who know of unlawful conduct or irregularities on the part of public


250 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

officials, is apparent. Butterworth v. Smith 494 U.S. 624, 635-636 (1990)

Mr. Damiano made a mistake when preparing his complaint in his copyright suit by not clarifying the manner in

which he set forth his lyrics. Mr. Damiano did not intend to defraud the court by “fabricating” lyrics for his

complaint, although he did make up titles. Mr. Damiano set forth different lines from songs he had written in a

way to illustrate a direct comparison to lyrics used by Dylan. The side-by-side approach of illustrating the

similarities between lyrics was recently used by the New York Times in an article published on September 14,

2006 to compare Dylan’s lyrics on ”Modern Times” to those of a Civil War poet named Henry Timrod. See

Motoko Rich, “Who’s This Guy Dylan Who’s Borrowing Lines From Henry Timrod?” New York Times, September

14 2006. The article (see attached) accuses Dylan of borrowing lines from Timrod. While the Times may be

more tactful in their layout (by clarifying each specific poem from which the lines were taken), the article uses the

terms “borrowing” and “plagiarism,” and notes how Dylan’s fans are bothered by Dylan’s failure to credit Timrod

on his album. Id.

Dylan himself downplayed the significance of a song Titles in article recently appearing in Rolling Stone

magazine. He’s asked in an interview how he came up with the Title “Highway 61 Revisited.” Dylan responds:

“Titles are something that come after you’ve done whatever it is you’ve done. I don’t set out with a title. It was

something that probably just passed through my mind. Why, does it have some impact?” Jann S. Wenner,

“Fortieth Anniversary Bob Dylan”, Rolling Stone, p. 48, (May 3-17, 2007).

The gravamen of Damiano’s lawsuit against Bob Dylan was the musical infringement he claimed with respect to

Dignity. To support this claim, Mr. Damiano retained an expert from Harvard University. The claim was dismissed,

but counsel is bewildered by Defendants’ use of the term “fraud” to characterize Mr.Damiano’s entire lawsuit.

This court repeated Defendants’ strong language in its published opinion finding Mr. Damiano in contempt. See

Damiano v. Sony Music Entertainment, 2000 WL 1689081 (D.N.J. 2000).

Mr. Damiano is simply a lay songwriter who has wanted recognition for his music. The deposition testimony in this

case supports the conclusion that Dylan took an interest in Mr. Damiano’s songs, and the Court found that Mr.

Damiano’s claims of access created a disputed issue of fact to survive summary judgment. Damiano v. Sony

Music Entertainment, 975 F.Supp. 623, 630 (D.N.J. 1996). In Mr. Damiano’s deposition., Defendants’ attacked

the credibility of his access claims by questioning how Bob Dylan provided Damiano backstage passes to his

concerts and the claim Dylan “looked at” Damiano from the stage during a concert. Defendants’ also mocked

Damiano’s stage recognition claim on page 11 of their Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants’ Motion to

Dismiss filed in the U.S. District Court on or about June 27, 1996.

In a manner that seems to mock this Court and/or Mr. Damiano, Bob Dylan bolstered the credibility of Damiano’s

claims of backstage access and stage recognition, during Dylan’s televised appearance at the Grammy Awards

ceremony in 1998. Mr. Dylan received the Grammy Award for Album of the Year (“Time Out of Mind”) while

Damiano’s case was pending on appeal in the Third Circuit. While receiving the award, Dylan comments as

follows:

“And I just wanted to say, one time when I was about 16 or 17 years old I went to see Buddy Holly play ... and I

was three feet away from him ... and he looked at me.”

“Bob Dylan’s Comments on Time Out of Mind,” On The Tracks, p. 8, (June 15, 1998)(see attached excerpt).

Given that the New York Times finds adequate cause to publish internet claims of Mr. Dylan borrowing lines from

Henry Timrod, and Dylan’s seeming public recognition of obscurities found in Damiano’s book “Eleven Years”,

this Court should view Damiano’s publications about his case as serving a public interest. Mr. Damiano cannot

undo this Court’s ruling as the originality questions settled in his case. However, he has “good cause” to inform

the public about his experiences in communicating lyrics and music to Bob Dylan. Mr. Damiano should be allowed

to claim an influence on Dylan’s songs, even if that influence does not entitle him to compensation under U.S.

Copyright law.

C.

Dylan’s Reasons for the Confidentiality Order Have Dissipated with the Passage of Time

Mr. Damiano asks this Court to lift the confidentiality order as to all information he has posted on the internet.

After facing the full weight of this Court’s contempt sanction on three occasions, Mr. Damiano re-published the

deposition material he considered salient to his arguments and audience respecting the lawsuit after Dylan and

Sony refused to engage in settlement talks about the confidentiality order. Given the extended period of time the

deposition material has been published, the First Amendment considerations which attach to Damiano’s unlawful

publications are inescapable. See generally New York Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)(pentagon

papers); Nebraska Press v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 539, 558 (1976)(prior restraint on speech held invalid against a

public trial); Short v. Western Electric Co., 566 F.Supp. 932, 934 (D.N.J. 1982)(clerk’s error in disseminating

settlement proceeding found to remove confidentiality issue from the “judicial process”).


251 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Defendants’ cannot readily make a case that the deposition material on Mr. Damiano’s website puts them in a

competitive disadvantage or at risk of losing proprietary trade secrets. Mr. Damiano has not published any such

information from the depositions. The information has been published for such an extended period at this point,

nothing can realistically be gained by further proscribing publication of the information under the protective order.

Defendants’ seek further protection with the confidentiality order for public relations purposes. Weighing this

interest against Mr. Damiano’s interest in speaking his conscience to the extent of facing repeated contempt

motions, the Court should find no further purpose served in sanctioning Mr. Damiano. To do so may only

contribute to a greater degree of mistrust and contempt:

“an enforced silence, however limited, solely in the name of preserving dignity of the bench, would probably

engender resentment, suspicion, and contempt much more than it would enhance respect.” Bridges v. California,

314 U.S. 252, 271 (1941).

Mr. Damiano’s beliefs or “diatribes” about his case are sincere. He’s not attempting to embarrass Bob Dylan or

exploit the lawsuit. He declined an offer to sell his story to a movie producer, and he has not been selling his

book. He’s been fined $50,820.69 for his publications. Mr. Damiano feels he has not been given fair recognition

for contributions he’s made to Dylan’s music published by Sony. Mr. Damiano believes the lack of credit he’s

been given, entitles him to publicly comment about his case and include supporting deposition testimony with his

commentary. He just doesn’t understand why he should not have this right.

In the alternative, Mr. Damiano would like to produce evidence to the Court as to which parties of his, give

consent to his internet publication of their testimony. With such consent, Mr. Damiano hopes the court will lift the

confidentiality order respecting each witness deposition. See Butterworth v. Smith 494 U.S. 624, 635-636 (1990).

II.

The Confidentiality Order Should Be Modified to Allow Mr. Damiano to Lobby and Explore the Merits of Bringing

Suit for the Song His Expert Analyzed.

This Court dismissed Mr. Damiano’s copyright infringement claim against Dignity due, in part, to language in the

Copyright Act stating that an unregistered song cannot be the basis of a suit. The Court’s opinion states as

follows:

“First, the court notes that the Exhibit 71 version cannot be the basis of an infringement claim because plaintiff is

unable to show that the work was registered with the Copyright Office. Thus, he has failed to establish a prima

facie case of musical infringement for that version of "Steel Guitars." The Copyright tape version, on the other

hand, although not originally identified as infringed work, apparently was registered. The court will therefore

analyze the remaining elements of an infringement claim for the registered version only.” Damiano v. Sony Music

Entertainment, 975 F. Supp. 623, 630(D.N.J. 1996).

The Court’s opinion does not speak to the issue as to whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice. The

Copyright Act does not address the question whether claims dismissed on the basis of not being registered may

be filed upon registration. See 17 U.S.C. § 411(a).

The silence of the Copyright Act on this point may be interpreted to mean the claim is adjudicated upon dismissal

to final judgment, or it may be interpreted to mean the Court cannot exercise jurisdiction over the claim until it has

been registered. Mr. Damiano’s counsel argued on summary judgment that Rule 15(b) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure may be interpreted to allow a claim to go forward without dismissal notwithstanding the statutory

predicate. This Court appears to have dismissed the Exhibit 71 version of Steel Guitars on the sole basis of the

registration defect.

Mr. Damiano should be able to lobby Congress to clarify whether the dismissed Exhibit 71 recording of Steel

Guitars can be re-filed upon registration. He should be able to use the testimony from his case to lend credibility

to the issue as to whether Dylan ever had access to his material. The Court found that Mr. Damiano established

a material dispute of fact on the access issue related to his claim. Nevertheless, Damiano’s claim has been

characterized as being “fraudulent” and “concocted” by Dylan and Sony. (Memorandum of Law in Support of

Defendants’ Motion to Hold Plaintiff James Damiano in Contempt, p. 4). Given this serious allegation, Mr.

Damiano should be permitted the latitude to present his claim to members of Congress and the media with all

supporting evidence for the purpose of clarifying the ambiguity of the Copyright Act on the issue of registration.

The Court should modify the Protective Order to allow Mr. Damiano to lobby his interest in filing a new suit before

the U.S. Congress. Mr. Damiano has no need to disclose proprietary business interests of Bob Dylan or Sony to

simply make the case that Dylan had access to his music. He can use the testimony of his own witnesses to make

this claim. However, he should also be permitted to disclose the facts regarding the destination of materials he

turned over to Anthony Tiller and Bob Dylan’s publicist. The testimony of these witnesses give credibility to

Damiano’s claim that Dylan had access to his material.

Conclusion


252 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Hold Plaintiff James Damiano in Contempt should be denied,

and the Court is respectfully requested to modify the confidentiality order in this case to allow the deposition

material Mr. Damiano has published to his detriment, having been sanctioned for contempt, to be released for

public consumption.

/s/David J. Foley, Esq.

Attorney for Plaintiff

274 Main St.

Keansburg, NJ 07734

732-495-6500

-AND-

Robert D. Church, Esq

Pro Hac Vice Pending

135 Briarwood Pl

Wake Forest, NC 27587

919-554-3088


I HEREBY CERTTIFY, on this ______ day of June, 2007, that a copy of the foregoing paper has been served by

emailing and mailing copies, via postage pre-paid first class mail, to Defendants’ counsel at the following address:

Steven D. Johnson, Esq.

Gibbons P.C.


18th & Arch Streets

Philadelphia, PA 19103

215-665-0400

E-mail: [email protected]

And

Orin Snyder, Esq.

200 Park Ave., 47th Floor

New York, NY 10166-0193

212-351-4000

I was sitting in a downtown

Village coffeehouse

Listening to the guitarist

strummin the strings

Just wandering somewhere

In a daze of thoughts

among a million other things

he took a break

put down the guitar

Came down off the stage

walked over to my table sat

down to talk

said hello through

the haze


253 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM


Washed away from tears

Spoke just ten words

And I knew him well

And everyone of his fears

He claimed to be a Christian

With fierce certainty

believed for sure

He'd be saved through

Christianity

Made me read the Bible

Wanted me to see

Dragged me into his home

To pray over me


Washed away by tears

Spoke just ten words and I

Knew him well

and everyone of his fears

His religion turned to superstition

And he thought he understood

All the wrong there is

In this world to understand

And all there is that's good

On October 7, 2008 Bob Dylan released "Tell Tale Signs" Which included an acoustic piano version of

"Dignity"


254 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Make a Free Website with Yola.

See Link below for more Dylan Plagiarisms

http://www.jamesdamiano.com

Click here to start typing your text

http://www.jamesdamiano.com


255 of 255 9/6/2009 7:25 AM

Documents

The Bob Dylan James Damiano