Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
2 stephen@donigerlawfirm.com
3 Scott Alan Burroughs (SBN 235718)
scott@donigerlawfirm.com
6 jgomes@donigerlawfirm.com
7 DONIGER / BURROUGHS
13
14
15
16
Plaintiff,
Case No.:
COMPLAINT FOR:
1. COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
17
18
19
20
v.
2. VIOLATIONS OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL CODE 987
21
22
Defendants.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
COMPLAINT
2 undersigned attorneys, hereby prays to this honorable Court for relief based on the
3 following:
INTRODUCTION
6 performer named Lorin Ashton (ASHTON) whose recorded and live1 shows rely
7 heavily on the exploitation of the work of visual artists. Plaintiff, HATTLER, a visual
8 artist, brings this claim against ASHTON to seek redress for the unauthorized and
9 unlawful misappropriation, performance, and exploitation of HATTLERs original
10 imagery.
11
12 City University of Hong Kongs School of Creative Media. Solo exhibitions and
13 retrospectives of his work have been shown at Pinakothek der Moderne Munich,
14 Tenderpixel London, Playgrounds Festival, and Lago Film Fest, among other venues.
15 HATTLER has received various awards, such as Cannes Lions, Bradford Animation
16 Festival, St. Louis Film Festival, London International Animation Festival, and
17 several Visual Music Awards. He has performed his work live at an array of
18 locations, including the Seoul Museum of Art, Reykjavik Visual Music, Re-New
19 Festival Copenhagen, and the European Media Art Festival. HATTLERS works of
20 art include original pieces entitled 1923 aka Heaven and Sync.
ASHTON, an electronic dance music artist who performs under the moniker
21
22 Bassnectar, derives revenue and builds the value of his brand through performances
23 of music accompanied by compelling visual and animated art, and the exhibition of
24 these shows online and in other fora. In August 2013, a Bassnectar agent, acting on
25
1
The term live is used loosely here, as, on information and belief, it is alleged that
ASHTONs performance consists primarily of the pressing of buttons and twisting of
27
knobs on an electronic or computer console.
26
28
2
COMPLAINT
8 ASHTON, resulted in a diminution in the value of 1923 aka Heaven and Sync,
9 and negatively impacted Plaintiffs ability to monetize his work. ASTHONs
10 conduct, as described herein, violates the Copyright Act.
11
12
1.
This action arises under the Copyright Act of 1976, Title 17 U.S.C.,
13 101 et seq.
14
2.
This Court has federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and
3.
17 1400(a) in that this is the judicial district in which a substantial part of the acts and
18 omissions giving rise to the claims occurred.
PARTIES
19
20
4.
21
5.
6.
Defendants DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are other parties not yet
3
COMPLAINT
7.
Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times
6 relevant hereto each of the Defendants was the agent, affiliate, officer, director,
7 manager, principal, alter-ego, and/or employee of the remaining Defendants and was
8 at all times acting within the scope of such agency, affiliation, alter-ego relationship
9 and/or employment; and actively participated in or subsequently ratified and adopted,
10 or both, each and all of the acts or conduct alleged, with full knowledge of all the
11 facts and circumstances, including, but not limited to, full knowledge of each and
12 every violation of Plaintiffs rights and the damages to Plaintiff proximately caused
13 thereby.
14
15
8.
Plaintiff authored two original visual works entitled 1923 aka Heaven
16 and Sync (hereinafter referred to as the Subject Works). The Subject Works were
17 published before the infringement at issue, and have been submitted for registration
18 with the Copyright Office. And, per the Berne Implementation Act of 1988, the
19 registration requirement is waived for the Subject Works.
20
9.
21 commercially published and exhibited original material from 1923 aka Heaven and
22 Sync without permission. ASHTON also published Plaintiffs work as part of his
23 online marketing. Non-inclusive true and correct depictions of portions of the Subject
24 Works and the corresponding unauthorized uses of the Subject Works are attached
25 hereto as Exhibit A.
26
27
28
4
COMPLAINT
10. ASHTON had knowledge that the Subject Works were created and
11. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that, without
12. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that ASHTON and
9 DOE Defendants organize, operate, and broadcast performances, concerts, and live
10 shows and derive revenue in connection with the foregoing, and that those revenues
11 are attributable in part to ASHTONs use of Plaintiffs Subject Works.
12
13
14
15
13.
16 though fully set forth, the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this
17 Complaint.
18
14.
19 and each of them, had access to the Subject Works, including, without limitation,
20 through viewing the Subject Works on Plaintiffs website and elsewhere online.
21
15. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,
22 and each of them, used material that was copied from the Subject Works, and
23 exploited said footage in various performances and exhibitions.
24
16. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,
5
COMPLAINT
1 Plaintiffs rights in the Subject Works to the public, including without limitation,
2 through live performances and online broadcasts.
3
17. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,
4 and each of them, infringed Plaintiffs rights by copying material from the Subject
5 Works without Plaintiffs authorization or consent.
6
18. Defendants, and each of them, had the right and ability to supervise the
19. Defendants, and each of them, with knowledge of the infringing activity
20. Due to Defendants, and each of their, acts of infringement, Plaintiff has
16 Defendants, and each of them, have obtained direct and indirect profits they would
17 not otherwise have realized but for their infringement of Plaintiffs rights in the
18 Subject Works. As such, Plaintiff is entitled to disgorgement of Defendants profits
19 directly and indirectly attributable to Defendants infringement of his rights in the
20 Subject Works in an amount to be established at trial.
21
22.
22 and each of them, have committed acts of copyright infringement, as alleged above,
23 which were willful, intentional and malicious, which further subjects Defendants, and
24 each of them, to liability for statutory damages under Section 504(c)(2) of the
25 Copyright Act in the sum of up to one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000.00)
26 per infringement and/or a preclusion from certain defenses and profit analyses.
27
28
6
COMPLAINT
1
2
(For Violations of California Civil Code 987 Against all Defendants, and
Each)
5 though fully set forth, the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this
6 Complaint.
7
24. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants
25. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,
14 and each of them, are liable for the physical alteration or destruction of Plaintiffs
15 fine art because Defendants, and each, had notice of Plaintiffs rights and consciously
16 disregarded same.
17
18 alteration as alleged above, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer
19 substantial damages to his business in an amount to be established at trial, as well as
20 additional general and special damages in an amount to be established at trial.
21
7
COMPLAINT
1
2
(For Violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. 1202
28.
5 though fully set forth, the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this
6 Complaint.
7
29.
8 and each of them, violated 17 U.S.C. 1202 et seq. by intentionally removing and/or
9 altering the copyright management information on the copy of the Subject Work
10 created by Defendants, and each (Mislabeled Copy), and distributing copyright
11 management information for the Mislabeled Copy with knowledge that the copyright
12 management information had been removed or altered without authority of the
13 copyright owner or the law, and distributing and publicly displaying the Mislabeled
14 Copy, knowing that copyright management information had been removed or altered
15 without authority of the copyright owner or the law, and knowing, or, with respect to
16 civil remedies under section 1203, having reasonable grounds to know, that the
17 conduct would induce, enable, facilitate, or conceal an infringement of any right
18 under this title. In addition, certain of the Mislabeled Copies included alterations and
19 manipulations by Defendants, and each of them, that appear to attribute or associate
20 one or more of the Subject Works to ASHTON. These acts further violate 1202.
21
30.
22
and each of them, knowingly removed and altered the copyright management
23
information on the Mislabeled Copy. A true and correct copy of certain exemplars of
24
25
26
31.
Act and exposes Defendants, and each of them, to additional and enhanced common
27
28
8
COMPLAINT
law and statutory damages and penalties, including in the form of Plaintiffs costs
and attorneys fees, pursuant to 17 USC 1203 and other applicable law.
32.
and each of their, conduct as alleged herein was willful, reckless, and/or with
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
plus all losses of Plaintiff, plus any other monetary advantage gained by
20
the Defendants, and each of them, through their infringement, the exact
21
22
23
applicable law.
24
25
26
27
28
9
COMPLAINT
d. That Plaintiff be awarded his costs and attorneys fees as available under
the Copyright Act, U.S.C. 101 et seq., 17 U.S.C. 1203, and other
applicable statutes;
4
5
6
7
10
11
12
i. That Plaintiff be awarded such further legal and equitable relief as the
Court deems proper.
Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues so triable pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
th
13 38 and the 7 Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Respectfully submitted,
14
15
16 Dated: June 9, 2016
By:
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10
COMPLAINT