Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Attorneys
2
a
r Plaintiff
9
10
ROBERT DAISLEY,
11
t2
13
t4
Case No.:
Plaintiff,
Dept. No.:
vs
15
Defendants.
t6
COMPLAINT
17
18
Plaintiff Robert Daisley ("Daisley"), by and through his attomeys, files this Complaint
t9
20
INTRODUCTION
2T
22
l.
Plaintiff Daisley is one of the co-authors for songs on one of the most famous hard
23
rock albums of all time, Blizzard of Ozz. The album reached multi-platinum status in the 1990s
24
25
Train" is regularly heard in sports arenas all around the world and has been featured in many
26
television shows, movies, commercials, and video games. Daisley also co-authored songs on the
27
band's second album, Diary of a Madman,whchwas released in 1981 and also enjoyed
28
considerable success.
2.
For the past 35 years, the copyrights to the songs co-authored by Daisley have
been administered by Osbourne and his affiliated companies in England and the United States,
both called Blizzard Music Limited. These entities made all of the decisions regarding the
commercial exploitation of the songs from the Blizzard of Ozz and Diary of a Madman albums
3.
Despite the fact that the songs on the two albums were instrumental in making
Osbourne an international rock star, Daisley has been deprived of his rightful compensation by
4.
Although royalties have been paid over the years to Daisley, Plaintiff leamed from
10
an audit
11
l2
5.
'When
13
thatBlizzard US was an independent subpublisher, which was entitled to a separate payment for
t4
its services. But Plaintiff had never seen or approved any agreements entitlingBlizzard US to a
l5
T6
accountants and lawyers also prevented Daisley or his representatives from reviewing the
l7
licensing agreements with third parties involving songs he wrote, claiming that he did not have the
18
right to access those documents or the books and records for Blizzard US.
t9
6.
Prior to this revelation, Daisley had understood that Osbourne had two separate
20
companies to administer the copyrights, one in England and one in the United States, but did not
2I
lcnow that Osbourne had directed those companies to deduct additional administrative fees before
22
23
7.
24
belief, Defendants have failed to pay Daisley his rightful share of royalties owed under the
25
publishing agreements for the many commercial exploitations of the songs on Blizzard of Ozz and
26
Diary of a Madman. Inthese instances, Defendants have failed to account to Plaintiff altogether
27
28
8.
income under the guise of separate companies was to learn that Osbourne had intended to defraud
Daisley of his rightfut share of income by hiding behind sham corporate entities.
g.
owed to him.
7
8
9
10
10.
Ptaintiff Daisley is
who resides in
11.
1l
located at P.O. Box 3600, Stateline, NV 89449. BIizzardUS also trades under the name Kord
T2
Music. BlizzardUs is a wholly-owned subsidiary ofBlizzard Music Limited, a company that was
13
t4
12.
15
Treasurer and Director of BLizzard US. Osbourne was the lead vocalist on the Blizzard of Ozz and
r6
Diary of a Madman albumsand currently performs as a solo artist. Upon information and belief,
t7
18
13.
99o/o
of the
shares in Blizzard
UK.
19
operated by Colin Newman ("Newman"). Newman and Company serves as the accountant for
20
2l
the auditor for Blizzard UK and is the Secretary fot Blizzard US.
22
14.
as
served as
Non-party Randy Rhoads was a co-author for the compositions on the Blizzard
of
23
Ozz and Diary of a Madma albums and was the guitarist for Osbourne's band. He passed away in
24
1982, andupon information and belief, members of his estate continue to receive royalty
25
26
27
15.
Non-party Lee Kerslake is a drummer and music composer for some of the
28
J
I
2
16.
Defendant BlizzardUS was incorporated under the laws of Nevada in 1981 and
maintains a registered agent care of Corporation Services of America , 27 6 Kingsbury Grade, Suite
6
7
17.
18.
Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to Nev. Rev. Stat. $ 14.065.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
l0
19.
Daisley, Rhoads, and Osbourne began working together in late 1979 after
11
Osbourne left his previous band, Black Sabbath. Under the direction of manager Don Arden
t2
13
t4
15
T6
20.
of
"theBlizzard of Ozz."
The majority of the first album was written by guitarist Randy Rhoads and bassist
21.
The track list for the resulting album, Blizzard of Ozz, contains the following
t7
a,
I Don't Know
18
b.
Crazy Train
19
c. Goodbye to Romance
20
d.
Dee
2l
e.
Suicide Solution
22
f.
Mr. Crowley
23
g. No Bone Movies
24
h.
Revelation
25
i.
26
27
28
ooCrazy
Looking at Me (Looking at You)" originally appeared as a B-side of the
Train" single, but later appeared on the Blizzard of Ozz album as bonus material.
22.
I
2
Osbourne shared songwriting credit with Daisley and Rhoads on the Blizzard
Compositions with the exception of "Dee," which was composed solely by Rhoads.
23
Kerslake j oined the Blizzard of Ozz towards the end of the creative process in
March 1980 for the band's first album. Of the tenBlizzard Compositions, Kerslake co-authored
24.
6
7
25.
9
10
The group was named "TheBlizzard of Ozz" before a management decision was
made to credit the album solely to Ozzy Osbourne. The album Blizzard of Ozz was released in
1980.
26.
11
The album tracks "Crazy Train" and "Mr. Crowley" from Blizzard of Ozz werc
T2
released as singles
13
Billboard's Top Tracks chart that year. In January 2009, the song achieved
t4
certification status.
27.
15
\ryas a
a 2 times Platinum
T6
t7
worldwide, making it Osbourne's best-selling album. Upon information and belief, the album
18
was the first of four Osbourne albums to attain Silver certification (60,000 units sold) by the
19
20
2t
22
28.
23
24
1981
As of August
1997 ,
it
Building on the success of the Blizzard of Ozz album, the four members of the
in
1981.
25
26
27
28
The song "You Said It All" was written during the 1980 tour and recorded live; as a result, no
ooYou
Said It All" was
studio veriion exists and it did not appear on the Blizzard of Ozz album.
released on a 1980 E.P. and subsequently used as bonus material on CD releases. The writers of
the song were Rhoads, Daisley and Kerslake and Osbourne.
5
29.
The track list for Diary of a Madman contains the following compositions
a.
b.
d.
Believer
e.
Little Dolls
f.
Tonight
g.
S.A.T.O.
10
h.
Diary of a Madman
1l
30.
Daisley, Rhoads and Kerslake wrote the Madman Compositions. Daisley and
t2
Rhoads co-authored every one of the Madman Compositions. Kerslake co-authored every one
13
ooYou
Can't
the Madman Compositions, with the exception of
T4
l5
T6
l7
18
I9
20
31.
Primarily based on his public role in the band, Osbourne shared songwriting credit
32.
33.
2I
22
language that were made available by the British Academy of Songwriters, Composers
23
24
of
34.
& Authors
Daisley assigned his author share of the copyright for the Blizzard Compositions
25
toBlizzard,UK on July 1, 1980 ("Daisley Blizzard Agreements"). From that date to the present,
26
BIizzardUK has acted as the publisher and administrator for Daisley's share of the Blizzard
27
Compositions.
28
6
35.
Relying on his rights under U.S. copyright law, Daisley terminated this assignment
of rights toBlizzardUK under the Daisley BlizzardAgreements on May 18,2015, and those
terminations
4
5
will
36.
On February 1, 1981, Daisley assigned his author share for the Madman
37.
Relying on his rights under U.S. copyright law, Daisley terminated his assignment
of rights toqlizzardUK under the Daisley Madman Agreements on May 18, 2015, and those
terminations
9
10
11
will
38.
Upon information and beliel Rhoads and Kerslake also assigned their copyright
39.
I2
UK has administered the copyrights for the Disputed Compositions and has been responsible for
13
collection and distribution of royalties to Plaintiff. The royalties are earned through the
l4
commercial exploitation of the Disputed Compositions in all formats, including, but not limited to:
15
16
t7
a.
b.
c.
18
t9
d.
20
e.
ooCommercial Exploitation").
Print licenses (for the sheet music) (together,
2r
40.
22
Exploitation. These licenses are individually-negotiated contracts between the publisher and third
23
parties, such as movie or television production companies, and often involve the payment
24
substantial fees, which depend in part on the percentage of the composition used and the
25
26
of
27
28
work. .. 90 per cent.. . of all gross royalties and other payments received by the Publisher in
7
said
respect of sound recordings, piano rolls, and all other devices for audibly and visual reproducing
the said work for sale or hire in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern lreland."
42. In the case of income earned through Commercial Exploitations in the United
BlizzardUK was required to pay Plaintiff "90 per cent... of all monies
received in respect of the right to record the said work on sound tracks for use with
cinematograph, television and other films, and to the right to use the said work (whether pre-
8
9
10
11
43.
US to serve as the publisher for the Disputed Compositions in the United States, including the
Commercial Exploitation of the Disputed Compositions.
44.
12
statements to Plaintiff
13
T4
a.
15
t6
b.
l7
18
T9
The share to be allocated to the recipient for the specific Disputed Composition
(denoted as "oSHARE" in the statement); and
20
Defendants andBlizzard UK are responsible for negotiating contracts with third parties and
2I
22
23
24
25
26
46.
Over the past 35 years, the Disputed Compositions have remained valuable
musical properties and have been utilized in new Commercial Exploitations year after year.
47.
27
removal of Daisley's and Kerslake's original bass and drum tracks by Osbourne and his wife,
28
Sharon Osbourne. In May 2011, Sony Legacy released its Deluxe 30th Anniversary Editions
8
of
Blizzard of Ozz with the original bass and drum tracks restored. These
Diary of a Madman
4
5
48.
and
*Crazy Train" has become a staple of classic rock radio playlists. The song, in
particular its opening chords, has also become a ubiquitous fixture in U.S. sports arenas.
49.
Daisley has won the ASCAP award for most played song in the United States for
"Crazy Train" five times for the years: 2005,2008, 2010,2011, and20l2.
been used in television programs, movies and video games in recent years.
50.
following:
10
a.
11
b.
t2
t3
d.
t4
e.
15
f.
t6
g.
I7
51.
Several of the Disputed Compositions are also featured in public spaces and
18
therefore earn fees from public performance organizations worldwide. The use of "Ctazy Train"
T9
20
52.
2T
maintain all of the agreements relating to the Commerciat Exploitations. Under the direction of
22
Osbourne, BlizzardUK has refused to provide the agreements for inspection and copying, even
23
though BlizzardUK has represented a value for these licenses in every one of the royalty
24
25
53.
26
handled by BlizzardUS, but has been unable to obtain that information as Blizzard US appears to
27
BlizzatdUK.
28
9
54.
2
J
55.
Compositions.
56.
I
9
10
As the accountant forBlizzard UK and the head of the company that distributes
representatives that the statements reflected all the monies owed on the Commercial Exploitations.
57.
11
l2
13
Disputed Compositions.
t4
58.
a comprehensive inspection
15
asserted that*allrelevant documentation was made available" during an audit in2007, including
I6
information about synchronization income. The Sheridans attorney also explained his clients were
t7
..under no obligation" to make books available for time periods that had already been reviewed in
18
2007.
t9
20
2t
59.
No agreement exists between BlizzardUK and Plaintiff that limits his rights to
review the license agreements and financial statements relating to the Disputed Compositions.
60.
No agreement exists between Defendant BlizzardUs and Plaintiff that limits his
22
rights to review the license agreements and financial statements relating to the Disputed
23
Compositions.
24
25
26
61.
After several delays due to BlizzardUK's lack of cooperation, Audit Time was
62.
The 2014 Audit revealed that Defendants improperly deducted fees from the gross
27
amounts received on Plaintiff s behalf for the Commercial Exploitations of the Disputed
28
Compositions.
10
63.
UK deducted an extra
64.
As a result, only 85% of the gross receipts collectedby Blizzard US for many
of
65
of the
gross receipts on the royalty statements in the "o/oRCVD" column and concealed from Plaintiff the
fact that Defendants had withheld from Plaintiff an additional l5%o of the royalties otherwise
owed to him.
9
10
11
t2
13
income.
67.
None of the Daisley Songwriter Agreements contained any rights for Blizzard US
68.
As Audit Time was unable to review the third-party agreements that Blizzard US
T4
15
amount of lost income or identi$ whether additional, unauthorized deductions have been made.
t6
69.
T7
withheld from
18
70.
t9
20
Audit Time was able to estimate that at least $2,000,000 had been fraudulently
P
laintiff.
71.
In addition to the issue regarding the 15% deduction, the October 2014 letter also
2T
stated thatBlizzard
22
despite the fact that they were Commercial Exploitations of the Disputed Compositions.
23
24
72.
October 2,20I41etter from the U.K. law firm Sheridans ("Sheridans Letter").
25
73.
26
a.
27
28
1l
in the U.S. tenitory and receives a fee of 15%by way of remuneration for the
services provided;"
b.
4
5
c.
That the'oroyalty statements rendered to [Daisley] may not have expressly stated
the amount of overseas sub-publisher retentions;" and
6
7
d. "All synchronization
accounted to your client in accordance with the terms of the Publisher Agreement
l0
74.
11
fact, including but not limited to the factthatthe "U.S. company... that accounts to" Blizzatd UK
t2
13
75.
t4
for Commercial Exploitations in the United States. Plaintiff has never been provided with
15
of any sub-publisher agreement between BIizzardUK and BlizzaUS during the decades of
t6
T7
76.
a copy
Upon information and belief, "standard" sub-publisher agreements are for a term
18
of years and would have been renewed at several junctures during Blizzard UK's administration
t9
20
77.
2l
sub-publisher to account to the publisher, and by extension the authors, and provide copies of all
22
business conducted by the sub-publisher, including, but not limited to synchronization licenses,
23
24
25
26
78.
79.
27
Blizzard,US) to reject all of Plaintiff s and Audit Time's requests for individual contracts and
28
additional information.
t2
80.
from Plaintiff.
81.
Prior to the receipt of the Sheridans Letter, Plaintiff was unaware that Blizzard US
withheld fuomBlizzard UK and Plaintiff additional income from Commercial Exploitations of the
82.
Defendant Osbourne has used BlizzardUS in order to retain income earned by the
Disputed Compositions in the United States so that he can deprive Plaintiff of earned income from
83.
Any and all unauthorized deductions of additional income earned through the
10
11
t2
13
t4
15
T6
17
18
84.
By failing to pay all income due to Plaintiff, Osbourne has also failed to account
85.
BlizzardUS. On or about March l,20l6,Defendant Osbourne became the CEO of Blizzard US.
86.
Upon information and belief, the only other corporate officer of either Blizzard US
I9
orBIizzardUK is Newman. Public corporate disclosures indicate that Newman is the Secretary of
20
Defendant BlizzardUS. Upon information and beliet Newman has also served as the accountant
2l
22
23
24
87.
Defendant Osbourne.
88.
Upon information and beliet BlizzardUs does not perform any publishing or
25
subpublishing functions for musical compositions beyond the Disputed Compositions and
26
27
28
89.
Upon information and belief, BIizzardUK does not perform any publishing
functions for musical composition authors beyond the Disputed Compositions and compositions
l3
90.
acts as a publisher
compositions involving Osbourne's wife, Sharon Osboume, or compositions where Osbourne has
gl.
92.
Upon information and belief, Defendant Osbourne does not maintain corporate
93.
10
Upon information and beliel the accounting records available publicly for
11
BlizzrdUS show financial inegularities, including income that has not been paid to the authors
t2
94,
95.
13
t4
15
exist for the sole purpose of exploiting the Disputed Compositions to the detriment of his co-
r6
authors.
l7
18
96.
BlizzardUK,
Defendant Osbourne is individually liable for the fraudulent activities undertaken by Blizzard US.
T9
20
2t
22
23
97
Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1
98.
24
thatBlizzard UK would pay Plaintiff "90 per cent. . . of all monies charged by the Publishers for
25
and received from, companies, firms or persons authorised to publish andlor reproduce
26
27
gg.
a contractual relationship
28
T4
2
J
4
5
6
7
8
100. BlizzardUs
102.
103. Plaintiff
104. The failure of Defendants to disclose that the gross amounts received from
10
exploitation of the Disputed Compositions was a material omission as the sole purpose of the
11
BlizzardUS is to administer and commercially exploit the Disputed Compositions in the United
t2
13
t4
15
105. Plaintiff
were the only means of learning about the income they had earned.
106.
Defendant BlizzardUs was fully aware that the amounts received from the
t6
Commercial Exploitations were greater than the amounts disclosed to Plaintiff in his individual
I7
royalty statements because the company negotiated the agreements that generated that income.
18
I07.
T9
in the United States, BIizzardUS intended for, and desired that, Plaintiff would believe that
20
BlizzaUK
2l
108. BlizzardUS's
22
23
24
25
it had not.
26
27
28
15
2
J
lI2.
113.
7
8
9
10
11
I2
13
t4
15
16
ll4.
115.
Osbourne owns Blizzard US and holds every single leadership position inBlizzard
116. Blizzard,US
Compositions and other intellectual property controlled by Osbourne and his family.
II7.
BlizzardUs
118. Through his domination of the Blizzard US, Defendant Osboume directed Blizza
t7
US and Newman to deduct additional percentage of gross income received, including the extra
18
t9
20
unauthorized deductions from gross income received from Commercial Exploitations by Blizzard
2l
22
120. Defendant Osbourne is personalty liable for fraud as he abused the corporate form
23
by treating BlizzardUS as a separate entity so that he could claim a larger percentage of income
24
25
Agreements.
26
27
l2I.
Maintaining
Plaintiff
a corporate
28
16
122. Plaintiff
was unaware that Defendant Osbourne had abused the corporate form
I23.
directing BlizzardUK, Newman and Sheridans to provide either false documentation that
corporate form, Plaintiff has not received his full entitlement to income from Commercial
I25.
9
10
Plaintiff has not received more than $2 million in income as a result of the
11
T2
punitive damages.
13
T4
15
t6
128. Defendants
have not provided Plaintiff with the complete and accurate files related
I2g.
T9
20
2l
order to assess the precise amount of income owed to Plaintiff beyond the estimated two
23
dollars.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment as follows:
A.
27
28
million
24
26
of
22
25
I7
18
in
B.
t7
C.
2
J
4
5
D.
E.
SNELL &
L.L.P
o.1528
9r56
#5t0
7
8
By
9
E
C.
50 w.
Reno, N
10
11
T2
13
I4
15
16
efigueira@crowell. com
l7
Attorneys
18
r9
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
18