Latest case filed November 21,2013
SANDERS LAW, PLLC
Craig B. Sanders, Esq. (CS4163)
100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
Garden City, New York 11530
Telephone: (516) 203-7600
Facsimile: (516) 281-7601
csanders@sanderslawpllc.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
File No.: 102947
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
BWP Media USA Inc. d/b/a Pacific Coast News and
National Photo Group, LLC,
Plaintiff(s),
vs.
EA MEDIA GROUP, LLC,
Defendant(s).
Docket No:
COMPLAINT
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
BWP Media USA Inc. d/b/a Pacific Coast News ("BWP") and National Photo Group,
LLC ("NPG") (hereinafter collectively “Plaintiff(s)”), by and through its undersigned counsel,
for their Complaint against Defendants EA MEDIA GROUP, LLC (hereinafter collectively
referred to as “Defendant(s)”) states and alleges as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1. Plaintiff(s) provide entertainment-related photojournalism goods and services and
own the rights to a multitude of photographs featuring celebrities, which it licenses to online and
print publications. Plaintiff(s) have obtained U.S. copyright registrations covering many of its
photographs, and others are the subject of pending copyright applications.
2. Defendant(s) own and operate a website known as www.in2eastafrica.net,
www.lifedaily.net and www.24topic.com (the website(s) are collectively referred to herein as the
Case 0:13-cv-62547-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2013 Page 1 of 8
“Websites”) and without permission or authorization from Plaintiff(s) copied, modified, and
displayed Plaintiff(s)' photograph(s) on the Websites and engaged in this misconduct knowingly
and in violation of the United States copyright laws.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the federal copyright infringement
claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1338(a) and 28 U.S.C. §1331. The Court has supplemental
jurisdiction over the claims arising under state law pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367(a) in that the
state claims are so related to the claims over which the court has original jurisdiction that they
form part of the same case or controversy. Additionally, this Court has subject matter
jurisdiction over all of the photographs, inclusive of the unregistered images. (See e.g. Perfect
10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 508 F.3d 1146, 1154 [9th Cir. 2007]; Olan Mills, Inc. v. Linn Photo
Co., 23 F.3d 1345, 1349 [8th Cir. 1994]; Pac. & S. Co., Inc., v. Duncan, 744 F.2d 1490, 1499 n.
17 [11th Cic. 1984]).
4. This Court has personal jurisdiction over EA MEDIA GROUP, LLC because EA
MEDIA GROUP, LLC maintains its principal place of business in Florida and purposely directs
substantial activities at the residents of Florida by means of the website described herein. This
Court also has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant(s) under the applicable long-arm
jurisdictional statutes of Florida.
5. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §1391(a)(2) because EA MEDIA GROUP, LLC
does business in this Judicial District and/or because a substantial part of the events or omissions
giving rise to the claim occurred in this Judicial District.
PARTIES
6. BWP is a California Corporation and maintains its principal place of business in
Los Angeles County, California.
7. NPG is a California Corporation and maintains its principal place of business in
Los Angeles County, California.
8. On information and belief, Defendant EA MEDIA GROUP, LLC, is a Florida
Case 0:13-cv-62547-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2013 Page 2 of 8
Limited Liability Company with a principal place of business in Broward County, Florida and is
liable and responsible to Plaintiff based on the facts herein alleged.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
9. Plaintiff(s) are the legal and beneficial owners of a multitude of photographs
which they license to online and print publications and have invested significant time and money
in building their photograph portfolios.
10. Plaintiff(s) have obtained several active and valid copyright registrations with the
United States Copyright Office (the “USCO”), which registrations cover many of their
photographs and many others are the subject of pending copyright applications.
11. Plaintiff(s)' photographs are original, creative works in which Plaintiffs own
protectable copyright interests.
12. Defendant(s) are the registered owner of the Websites and are responsible for
their content.
13. The Websites are monetized in that they contain paid advertisements and/or sell
merchandise to the public and, on information and belief, Defendant(s) profit from these
activities.
14. Without permission or authorization from Plaintiff(s), Defendant(s) copied,
modified, and/or displayed Plaintiff(s) rights protected photographs (hereinafter collectively
referred to as “Photograph(s)”), as set forth in Exhibit “1” which is annexed hereto and
incorporated in its entirety herein, on the Websites.
15. On information and belief, the Photograph(s) were copied without license or
permission, thereby infringing on the Copyrights (hereinafter collectively referred to as the
“Infringement(s)”).
16. As is set forth more fully in Exhibit “1”, each listed infringement contains the
URL (“Uniform Resource Locator”) for a fixed tangible medium of expression that was
sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to be communicated for a period of more than
transitory duration and constitutes a specific item of infringement. (See 17 U.S.C. §106(5);
Case 0:13-cv-62547-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2013 Page 3 of 8
Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 508 F.3d 1146, 1160 [9th Cir. 2007]).
17. On information and belief, Defendant(s) were aware of facts or circumstances
from which the determination regarding the Infringement(s) was apparent. Based on the totality
of the circumstances, Defendant(s) cannot claim that they were not aware of the infringing
activities, including the specific Infringement(s) which form the basis of this complaint, on the
Website(s) since such a claim would amount to only willful blindness to the Infringement(s) on
the part of Defendant(s).
18. On information and belief, Defendant(s) engaged in the Infringement(s)
knowingly and in violation of applicable United States Copyright Laws.
19. Additionally, on information and belief, Defendant(s), with “red flag” knowledge
of the infringements, failed to promptly remove same. (See 17 U.S.C. §512(c)(1)(A)(i)).
20. On information and belief, Defendant(s) have received a financial benefit directly
attributable to the Infringement(s). Specifically, by way of the Infringement(s), the Websites had
increased traffic to the and, in turn, realized an increase their advertising revenues and/or
merchandise sales. (See 17 U.S.C. §512(c)(1)(B)).
21. As a result of Defendant(s)' misconduct, Plaintiff(s) have been substantially
harmed.
FIRST COUNT
(Direct Copyright Infringement, 17 U.S.C. §501 et seq.)
22. Plaintiff(s) repeat and incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the
preceding paragraphs, as though set forth in full herein.
23. The Photograph(s) are original, creative works in which Plaintiff(s) own
protectable copyright interests.
24. Plaintiff(s) have not licensed Defendant(s) the right to use the Photograph(s) in
any manner, nor have Plaintiff(s) assigned any of its exclusive rights in the Copyrights to
Defendant(s).
25. Without permission or authorization from Plaintiff(s) and in willful violation of
their rights under 17 U.S.C. §106, Defendant(s) improperly and illegally copied, reproduced,
Case 0:13-cv-62547-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2013 Page 4 of 8
distributed, adapted, and/or publicly displayed works copyrighted by Plaintiff.
26. Defendant(s)' reproduction of the Photograph(s) and display of the Photograph(s)
on the Website(s) constitutes willful copyright infringement.
27. On information and belief, thousands of people have viewed the unlawful copies
of the Photograph(s) on the Website(s).
28. On information and belief, Defendant(s) had knowledge of the copyright
infringement alleged herein and had the ability to stop the reproduction and display of
Plaintiff(s)' copyrighted material.
29. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant(s)' misconduct, Plaintiff(s) have
been substantially harmed in an amount to be proven at trial.
SECOND COUNT
(Contributory Copyright Infringement)
30. Plaintiff(s) incorporate, as though fully set forth herein, each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs, as though set forth in full herein.
31. In the event that the Photograph(s) were hyperlinked into the Website(s), and
thereby not stored directly on the Defendant(s) servers, Defendant(s) are liable as contributory
infringers since they had actual and/or constructive knowledge of another's infringing conduct
and induced, caused and/or materially contributed to that conduct. (See e.g., Perfect 10, Inc. v.
Amazon.com, Inc., 508 F.3d. 1146, 1171 [9th Cir. 2007]; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v.
Grokster, Ltd., 545 U.S. 913, 929-30 [2005]; A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. 239 F.3d 1004,
1019 [9th Cir. 2001]; Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 [1984]).
32. For example, Defendant(s) have caused enabled, facilitated and materially
contributed to the infringement complained of herein by, providing the tools and instruction for
infringement via their Website(s) and have directly and indirectly promoted the infringement and
refused to exercise their ability to stop the infringement made possible by their distribution.
33. Defendants' infringement is and has been willful, intentional, purposeful, and in
disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs, and has caused substantial damage to Plaintiffs
34. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant(s)' misconduct, Plaintiff(s) have
been substantially harmed in an amount to be proven at trial.
Case 0:13-cv-62547-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2013 Page 5 of 8
THIRD COUNT
(Vicarious Copyright Infringement)
35. Plaintiff(s) incorporate, as though fully set forth herein, each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs, as though set forth in full herein.
36. Defendant(s) enjoyed a directed financial benefit from the infringing activity of
its users and declined to exercise the right and ability to supervise or control that infringing
activity, despite their legal right to stop or limit the directly infringing conduct as well as the
practical ability to do so.
37. Accordingly, Defendant(s) are liable as vicarious infringers since they profited
from direct infringement while declining to exercise a right to stop or limit it. (See e.g., Perfect
10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 508 F.3d. 1146, 1171 [9th Cir. 2007]; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., 545 U.S. 913, 929-30 [2005]).
38. As a result of Defendant(s)' misconduct, Plaintiff(s) have been substantially
harmed in an amount to be proven at trial.
FOURTH COUNT
(Inducement of Copyright Infringement)
39. Individuals using the Websites that Defendant(s)' created, distributed and
promoted, have been provided with the means and mechanisms through such Websites to
directly infringe and are directly infringing Plaintiff(s)' copyrights, by, for example, creating
unauthorized reproductions of Plaintiff(s)' copyrighted works and distributing copies of such
works in violation of Plaintiff(s)' exclusive rights (17 U.S.C. §§ I06 and 501).
40. Defendant(s) have induced and continue to induce infringement by, for example,
providing technology on the Websites to download and/or forward an image to such social media
providers such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter and/or failing to block or diminish access to
infringing material even though there are technological means to do so that are known to
Defendant(s).
41. Defendant(s)' infringement is and has been willful, intentional, purposeful and in
disregard of the rights of Plaintiff(s), arid has caused substantial damage to Plaintiff(s).
42. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant(s)' infringement, Plaintiff(s) have
been substantially harmed in an amount to be proven at trial.
Case 0:13-cv-62547-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2013 Page 6 of 8
FIFTH COUNT
(Injunction Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §502)
43. Plaintiff(s) incorporate, as though fully set forth herein, each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs, as though set forth in full herein.
44. Plaintiff(s) request a permanent injunction pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §502(a)
prohibiting Defendants from displaying the Infringements.
SIXTH COUNT
(Attorney Fees and Costs Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §505)
45. Plaintiff(s) incorporate, as though fully set forth herein, each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs, as though set forth in full herein.
46. Plaintiff(s) request, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §505, their attorney fees and costs for
the prosecution of this action.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff(s) respectfully requests judgment as follows:
1. That the Court enter a judgment finding that Defendants have infringed directly,
contributorily and/or vicariously as well have induced other to violation Plaintiff(s)' rights to the
Photograph(s) in violation of 17 U.S.C. §501 et seq. and award damages and monetary relief as
follows:
a. Statutory damages against Defendant(s) pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §504(c) of
$150,000 per infringement or in the alternative Plaintiff(s)' actual damages
and the disgorgement of Defendant(s)' wrongful profits in an amount to be
proven at trial; and
b. A permanent injunction against Defendant(s) pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §502; and
c. Plaintiff(s)' attorneys' fees pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §505; and
d. Plaintiff(s)' costs; and
2. Such other relief that the Court determines is just and proper.
Case 0:13-cv-62547-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2013 Page 7 of 8
DATED: November 21, 2013
SANDERS LAW, PLLC
_/s/ Craig B. Sanders ____________
Craig B. Sanders, Esq. (CS4163)
100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
Garden City, New York 11530
Telephone: (516) 203-7600
Facsimile: (516) 281-7601
csanders@sanderslawpllc.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
File No.:102947
REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial of this action by jury.
DATED: November 21, 2013
SANDERS LAW, PLLC
_/s/ Craig B. Sanders ____________
Craig B. Sanders, Esq. (CS4163)
100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
Garden City, New York 11530
Telephone: (516) 203-7600
Facsimile: (516) 281-7601
csanders@sanderslawpllc.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
File No.:102947
Case 0:13-cv-62547-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2013 Page 8 of 8