Run date: 2023-03-17

CaseClaim typeDescription of WorkDescription of Infringement (Truncated at 1200 characters if longer)Description of harm suffered and relief sought (Truncated at 1200)StatusClaimantClaimant Law FirmRespondentMost recent filing
23-CCB-0114Not availableNANANot availableNo claim certified, no orders to amendSee caption/docketNot availableSee caption/docketNone
23-CCB-0113Not availableNANANot availableNo claim certified, no orders to amendSee caption/docketNot availableSee caption/docketNone
23-CCB-0112Not availableNANANot availableNo claim certified, no orders to amendSee caption/docketNot availableSee caption/docketNone
23-CCB-0111Not availableNANANot availableNo claim certified, no orders to amendSee caption/docketNot availableSee caption/docketNone
23-CCB-0110infringementWings with sauceThey stole from me and decided to profit from my photograph by linking its product line, web based store, and sharing it with people on a social media platform. The stolen photograph your client used was shared on facebook on March 26th, 2023. Liked, loved, and otherwise reacted by 886 people, commented on by 553 people, and shared 63 times.Infringer's profits. Without discovery, I cannot know how much business they obtained from using my photograph. I am seeking $5,000.00 or the applicable limit for this claim, whichever is less.No claim certified, no orders to amendPedro WebbernoneBuzzFeed Media Enterprises, Inc.Claim
23-CCB-0109infringementAlso utilizing the minor scale and augmented/offscale notes, this track uses orchestral and operatic insturments, and organsUnauthrotized dertivetives of copyrighted phonograms - many of the songs released on black 17 media are altered samples of these two songs in particularMonetary Compensation for royalties and accreditation on the works as a producer and co-writer, accreditation on any RIAA certifications where my work is sampledNo claim certified, no orders to amendZachary S WhitenoneBlack 17 MediaClaim
23-CCB-0108infringementYoutube LiveRespondent screen recorded my content in its entirety and posted it to their youtube channel without having my explicit consent.I have experienced a loss of revenue in the form of views on youtube. In addition to emotional pain and suffering as the content has been used in a form of slander. I am seeking the removal of my content from the respondents youtube channel, legal fees associated with the removal in the amount pending the outcome of this case and compensation for the emotional pain and suffering in the amount of $5,000.No claim certified, no orders to amendJulia GarcianoneLisbeth ZavalaClaim
23-CCB-0107infringementSound RecordingsFirstly, this artist has taken multiple beats from our production team that are copyrighted. This artist Blasian Doll refuses to pay us or credit us in the appropriate manner. She simply does not own creative control of the beats to any of the songs listed above. Likewise, the song "Missy Elliott" does not credit the original featuring artist that we initially sold the beat too, or lack of credit to our publishing and production team that created the initial beat infringed upon. Both of these works are displayed publicly on Youtube and Instagram.Loss of revenue and reputation as they have monetized multiple sound records or beats that we have created. Actual damages suffered sought as a result of the infringement and any profits due to the infringer lacking to pay us for these works or properly credit us. Some of these videos have been available online for up to one year.No claim certified, no orders to amendAnthony D. FarrisnoneBlasian BarbieClaim
23-CCB-0106-DMCANANAMs. Tarens has had rightfully-owned content taken down several times, interfering with her potential business opportunities. This has led to many missed and/or lost opportunities. Ms. Tarens is seeking damages, to the extent permitted by law, for David Hottenstine's conduct in bad faith.No claim certified, no orders to amendElise TarensDonahue Fitzgerald LLPDavid HottenstineClaim
23-CCB-0105infringementPainting of a bass fishA virtually exact copy of claimant's artwork was reproduced and featured on multiple flyers for multiple fishing tournaments. The flyers constitute an unlawful derivative work and all copies distributed and flyers displayed, constitute acts of infringement. The only distinction between the original and the respondent's use is the "cropping" and/or removal of certain Copyright Management Information, consequently resulting in further cropping of other portions in order to keep the focal point on the subject of the painting. Respondents, and each of them, were directly involved in the reproduction, distribution, display, adaptation, and/or creation of a derivative work, using Claimant's artwork. Access to the artwork is established by the striking similarity/identicality between the artwork and the bass fish in the flyers, precluding any possibility of independent creation. Despite three separate notices to respondents, respondents continue to display copies of the flyers bearing an exact copy of claimant's artwork.Claimant has suffered damages in an amount yet to be determined, including without limitation, lost licensing revenue, royalties, loss in fair market value. Claimant also seeks and direct or indirect profits Respondents realized as a result of their acts of infringement. At claimant's election, claimant reserves the right to elect statutory damages. Claimant has also incurred costs and attorneys' fees, for which it seeks full recovery.No claim certified, no orders to amendJon Q WrightAxenfeld Law Group, LLCThomas HartshornClaim
23-CCB-0104infringementNone givenAn exact copy of claimant's artwork was reproduced and featured on multiple flyers for multiple fishing tournaments. The flyers constitute an unlawful derivative work and all copies distributed and flyers displayed, constitute acts of infringement. Respondents, and each of them, were directly involved in the reproduction, distribution, display, adaptation, and/or creation of a derivative work, using Claimant's artwork. Access to the artwork is established by the striking similarity/identicality between the artwork and the bass fish in the flyers, precluding any possibility of independent creation. Despite three separate notices to respondents, respondents continue to display copies of the flyers bearing an exact copy of claimant's artwork.Claimant has suffered damages in an amount yet to be determined, including without limitation, lost licensing revenue, royalties, loss in fair market value. Claimant also seeks and direct or indirect profits Respondents realized as a result of their acts of infringement. At claimant's election, claimant reserves the right to elect statutory damages. Claimant has also incurred costs and attorneys' fees, for which it seeks full recovery.No claim certified, no orders to amendJon Q WrightAxenfeld Law Group, LLCFishing For Hip Hop LLCClaim
23-CCB-0103infringementThe work is a video clip of myself and another person riding in a vehicle with dialog.The video is displayed, unedited, on the YouTube channel, Lycan Snark, owned by Jamie Stone. He is requesting donations within the video with my work. He has received a letter demanding the removal of my work from his channel and explaining the use of my work costs $30,000 and 50% of any profits made on the channel with my work.The man is using my work without my consent. I has received a letter from me demanding he remove the work. I have lost the fees associated with utilizing my work which is $30,000 per upload and 50% of the profits made on the channels with my work.No claim certified, no orders to amendChristy CastrononeJamie SoneCertificate
23-CCB-0102Not availableNANANot availableNo claim certified, no orders to amendSee caption/docketNot availableSee caption/docketNone
23-CCB-0101infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 248: Israel Adesanya vs. Yoel Romero mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on March 7, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents El Pueblo Mex #2, Inc., Bashar Y. Ballo, and Yasir Y. Ballo (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as El Pueblo Mexican Food located at 2673 Via De La Valle, Suite C, Del Mar, CA 92014 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondents Bashar Y. Ballo and Yasir Y. Ballo are indiviClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.No claim certified, no orders to amendJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisEl Pueblo Mex #2, Inc.Claim
23-CCB-0100infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 248: Israel Adesanya vs. Yoel Romero mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on March 7, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Roxie’s Catering LLC, Roxie L. Hensley, William G. Hensley, and William H. Hensley (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Roxie’s on Grand located at 221 E. Grand Avenue, Laramie, WY 82070 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondents Roxie L. Hensley, William G. Hensley, Claimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.No claim certified, no orders to amendJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisRoxie's Catering LLCClaim
23-CCB-0099infringementTiktok LiveRespondent screen recorded my content in its entirety and posted it to their youtube channel without having my explicit consent.I have experienced a loss of revenue in the form of views on youtube. In addition to emotional pain and suffering as the content has been used in a form of slander. I am seeking the removal of my content from the respondents youtube channel, legal fees associated with the removal in the amount pending the outcome of this case and compensation for the emotional pain and suffering in the amount of $5,000.No claim certified, no orders to amendJulia J GarcianoneTeresa Smith GomezClaim
23-CCB-0098infringementThis is a 4 second clip of me talking/ performingHe has uploaded my copyrighted work in its entire format, unaltered. He has used it for part of his intro on his videos which he collects money for.I have notified the respondent through the YouTube complaint process and I've tried to serve him with written notification to remove my copyrighted work. I have suffered the loss of recognition for my work, as well as the fee I charge for using my work. I charge $30,000 per upload and 50% of the profits made on the channel using my work. I am seeking relief of $30,000 statutory relief.No claim certified, no orders to amendCole CortnernoneJamie StoneClaim
23-CCB-0097-DMCANANAAs a self-employed person - journalist and analyst on a freelance, my articles are my only source of income, and the specialty and uniqueness of my work help me to support myself. So, the use of my intellectual property (my articles) without my permission deprives me of my means of livelihood. Based on that, I kindly ask you to oblige the resource moshennik.eu and online service provider Google.com to remove my articles from the website moshennik.eu and Google search results.No claim certified, no orders to amendNontobeko LucasnoneViktor DobroserdovClaim
23-CCB-0096infringementMoroccan Fan asks Ancelotti for chewing gum, a video made by our client which could be seen here: https://videohat.io/item/2191Reuploading the content without our permission of the creator's permission.Hi, I hope all is well with you. We are a video licensing agency, we license our clients content to networks and video marketing websites. The respondents had uploaded the content without any permission of us or the creator of the video. We reached out to them to clear a license to use the video but they refused. This caused us the loss of 500USD per license per URL (Total: 2000USD). Given the fact that the respondents is a renowned network, who is very aware of the copyright laws and licensing rules, their copyright team did not cooperate when we reached out to them. Neither their PR team. They had so many choices before violating our copyright, they could have just texted our client reaching for his permission (other users have done that) or they could have reached out to us to pay the licensing fees. Or at least they should have accepted the licensing offers we submitted to them. But they insisted on violating our rights and refused to license the content. The question is: if we or one of our clients has uploaded a sports event owned by ESPN, would it be ok? Of Course not. Same should apply to ESPN distributing our content without permission. We are asking for aNo claim certified, no orders to amendVideoHat LLCnoneESPNClaim
23-CCB-0095infringementMoroccan Fan asks Ancelotti for chewing gum, a video made by our client which could be seen here: https://videohat.io/item/2191Reuploading the content without our permission of the creator's permission.Hi, I hope all is well with you. We are a video licensing agency, we license our clients content to networks and video marketing websites. The respondents had uploaded the content without any permission of us or the creator of the video. We reached out to them to clear a license to use the video but they refused. This caused us the loss of 500USD per license per URL (Total: 1000USD). Given the fact that the respondents is a renowned network, who is very aware of the copyright laws and licensing rules, their copyright team did not cooperate when we reached out to them. They had so many choices before violating our copyright, they could have just texted our client reaching for his permission (other users have done that) or they could have reached out to us to pay the licensing fees. Or at least they should have accepted the licensing offers we submitted to them. But they insisted on violating our rights and refused to license the content. The question is: if we or one of our clients has uploaded a sports event owned by BeinMedia Group, would it be ok? Of Course not. Same should apply to BeinMedia Group distributing our content without permission. We are asking for a reliNo claim certified, no orders to amendVideoHat LLCnonebeIN SPORTS AmericasClaim
23-CCB-0094infringementMy Dancing Tap Shoes e-book, coloring book, color hardback, color paperback. I sent a hardback copy to the Library of Congress.I was looking for something on-line and saw that my daughter's and my property was being sold on many sites when I didn't sign up for expanded distribution or ever gave any third parties permission to sell them or had not ever given them our files. That was @ June 2021 when I found out about all these sellers of Our property. Our files were up-loaded print ready files to Create Space printers @2016 now Kindle Direct Publishing. Ingram Spark published her hardback because Create Space of Amazon was not doing hard backs in 2016. I wanted to get my Will in place and get ownership signed over to my daughter Chesley. I bought my own publishing package from Mike Motz.com and Will makes books @gmail.com did our e-book files. Only two businesses had access to my daughter and my files. This claim is against Ingram Spark too. They are now called Ingram content group. I talked to Jean Nicholson and a Stacey Shamrock, etc.We have lost income because I can't ever remember her getting royalities. I ordered a box of books in 2016 and I didn't get royalties for them. I don't know where my daughter's royalties are going. I lost money getting a product ready for sale. The stress of others stealing your property and not knowing would we get our books back so they will be our legacy for other generation's to enjoy. I found eight ASINs that pop up when I do a Google search and many ISBNs. The ISBN number I paid for that my bookmaker gave me did not get put on any of our books. So I am wondering are they legitimate and the one on my hardback that I sent in to the Library of Congress. I found out when I filled out an infringement form the computer generated message said Amazon did not have a product with this ASIN, B015GDR6ZC.No claim certified, no orders to amendHollis L Nelson, MsnoneKindle Direct Publishers of Amazon and Ingram contentIgram content had access to my print ready filesand gram content groupClaim
23-CCB-0093infringement-DMCASelfie of Max Sebrechts, shown with his torso nakedThe selfie picture of Max Sebrechts was wrongfully used and mixed up with false allegations of rigging of the Miss USA pageant, held back on October 3rd in Reno, NV. This post was published by Brooke Kato, copied from Daily Mail, who are also being sued for copyright infringement and the public use of a picture with commercial gain. Any public online post using this picture must immediately be removed to avoid any further harm.Max Sebrechts was forced to step down as Vice President because of false allegations of rigging after the Oct 3rd Miss USA pageant and the mixed-up articles published by DailyMail.com ("DMG Media") on October 17th 2022. The US-based and US-resident reporter "Ben Ashford", illegally used the "Selfie of Max Sebrechts", which had no place in the article and which has already been proven to be irrelevant in the alleged rigging claims. These have been proven negative altogether in the meantime. It was a picture which dated back from January 16th 2018. The picture was used to do nothing but harm Max Sebrechts and his family. Also, Max Sebrechts is not separated from his wife, as the article suggests. The article is still illegally published as of Feb 28 2023 and has resulted in statutory damages in the amount of $150,000. The picture 'Selfie of Max Sebrechts' shows Max Sebrechts half naked, and was registered with US Copyright Office in accordance with title 17, United States Code.No claim certified, no orders to amendMaxime SebrechtsnoneDMG MediaClaim
23-CCB-0092infringementSelfie of Max SebrechtsThe selfie picture of Max Sebrechts was wrongfully used and mixed up with false allegations of rigging of the Miss USA pageant, held back on October 3rd in Reno, NV. This post was published by Brooke Kato, copied from Daily Mail, who are also being sued for copyright infringement and the public use of a picture with commercial gain. Any public online post using this picture must immediately be removed to avoid any further charges.Max Sebrechts was forced to step down as Vice President because of false allegations of rigging after the Oct 3rd pageant and the mixed-up articles published by New York Post (NYP Holdings, Inc.) on October 20th 2022. The article was copied from another source from Daily Mail. The reporter "Ben Ashford" at Daily Mail, illegally released the Selfie of Max Sebrechts, which had no place in the article. It was a picture back from January 16th 2018. The picture was used to ridicule Max Sebrechts and falsely used to create a public reaction resulting in financial damages occurred in the amount of $150,000. The picture 'Selfie of Max Sebrechts' shows Max Sebrechts half naked, and was registered with US Copyright Office in accordance with title 17, United States Code.No claim certified, no orders to amendMaxime SebrechtsnoneNYP Holdings, Inc. attn: Privacy LeadClaim
23-CCB-0091infringementArticle I published on a new paradigm I created for leader developmentAmerican University copied the following text, almost in whole, from my copyrighted article: The ALFA program begins with AU faculty working with the agency director to identify 1-3 difficult organizational challenges along with identifying an executive sponsor for each challenge. AU faculty then meet with each executive sponsor to assess the suitability of the problem for the Action Learning process; clarify the roles of the AU faculty, executive sponsor, and the team members; and provide guidance in selecting an effective Action Learning team. The executive sponsor for each challenge then selects Action Learning teams comprising 6-7 people each. Days 1-3:The first three days are classroom-based and focused on developing the leadership competencies necessary to utilize the Action Learning methodology. The class will focus on such skills as active listening, asking powerful questions, reflection, strategic thinking, and problem solving. Each team member is required to select one or more personal leadership developmental goals on which to work during the Action Learning process. Participants are challenged to let go of ingrained perceptions of leadership and problem solving - I am unable to market my leader development program to Federal agencies in Washington DC because American University uses its weight and imprimatur to market its own program, based almost entirely on my copyrighted article. See pp. 40-41 for the text that American University plagiarized on its web site from my article. As a result of this copyright violation, I (as an independent consultant) have lost a substantial amount of income in the Federal market. I seek $30,000 in relief for my losses.No claim certified, no orders to amendRobert KramernoneTraevena ByrdClaim
23-CCB-0090infringementIt's a true life story novel based on the experiences of Connie Causey Price, who lives in Myrtle, Beach, SC, it describes her going through an illegal medical procedure that almost kills her, it goes though her hiring an appeals lawyer, who turns out to be a serial killer, it tells her complete life story.a novel that i published and have the total rights to, was rewritten by another publisher and sold online, thorough various sources.Genius Books being a larger publisher was able to spread the book across the internet, whereas Ghetto Street Writers Publishing, LLC didn't have the resources to do so, thus it hurt the sales tremendously of our sales, i'm seeking a large montary settlement based solely on books sales.No claim certified, no orders to amendGhetto Street Writers Publishing LLCnoneBOBBIE L Thomas, JrClaim
23-CCB-0089infringementdeviated septum diagramMy original artwork of a deviated nasal septum diagram was copywritten on August 7, 2014. I recently discovered the same artwork posted on company website called Quizlet.com based in San Francisco. They're using my copyright deviated nasal septum image for commercial purposesQuizlet.com is using my copywritten image to make a profitNo claim certified, no orders to amendWilliam PortueseWilliam Portuese, MDQuizlet, IncClaim
23-CCB-0088infringementMEMES REGARDING HEALTH CARE, GRAPHICS CONTAINING PRODUCT DET,AILS, IMAGES OF TRADEMARK, PHOTOGRAPHY BY IVY ROBINSONFACEBOOK BEGAN TO DENY ALL MY AD REQUEST, AND WHEN I TRIED TO MAKE CHANGES TO MY BUSINESS PAGE, I WAS REPEATEDLY LOCKED OUT OF MY BUSINESS PAGE. I BEGAN TO ACCESS THE BUSINESS MANAGER PORTAL ON FACEBOOK TO RUN ADS AND EVENTUALLY, I WAS NO LONGER ABLE TO ACCESS THE BUSINESS MANAGER PORTAL. I DO NOT KNOW THE EXACT DATE, BUT WITHIN THE LAST 2 YEARS, A "BUSINESS AGENCY" WAS ADDED TO MY BUSINESS ACCOUNT. THE AGENCY ONLY HAS SERIAL NUMBERS, NO NAME. I DIDNT ADD IT TO MY PROFILE, AND AFTER NUMEROUS ATTEMPTS, I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DELETE IT. HOWEVER, I CAN NOT ACCESS ANY BUSINESS DATA ON MY PAGE, NOR CAN I REMOVE MY BUSINESS FROM THE "BUSINESS AGENCY". TO DATE IVE TRIED TO EMAIL FACEBOOK ONLY TO GET A REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS THAT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO MY BUSINESS. I'VE ASKED TO HAVE THE BUSINESS AGENCY REMOVED AND EVEN ASKED IF THERE IS A RECORD OF WHEN THIS ENTITY WAS PLACED ON MY PAGE. NO ONE AT FACEBOOK CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION, NOR REMOVE THE AGENCY OR GIVE ME ACCESS TO MY BUSINESS PAGE. OVER THE YEARS, I'VE TRIED TO RUN MY BUSINESS THRU FACEBOOK AND EVERY ATTEMPT ENDS UNSUCCESSFUL. THE PAGES WILL CRASH OR ACCESS WILL BE DENIED. AS A RESULT, I CANT RUN A SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS ON FACEMy business page gets no activity, I cant link my Instagram account to my facebook and its a requirement if you plan to have a Instagram business account. All of my ads are rejected, all products that I sell on my website are prohibited on Facebook. My website platform is Shopify and Facebook is the largest Social media ad partner, but it never connects fully. My access is constantly denied. The relief I seek is: release my business page to me, remove the business agency from my business page, reveal when this business agency was placed on my business page and the origin of this business agency, the owner of this business agency and any information Facebook has on this business agency. Remove any and all business pages that has the names: Ivy Robinson, Ivy Sagarius, Ivy Sagarius Robinson, Seanjari Preeti, Seanjari Preeti Womb Healing. I also request the $30,000.00 for loss of sales, loss of business, loss of customer base - I can not communicate from this business page in over a year.No claim certified, no orders to amendSEANJARI PREETI WOMB HEALINGnoneFACEBOOK METAClaim
23-CCB-0087infringementwriters guild registered and copyright.gov The lawyer twin sister has a baby by a inmate and she is a police officer. According to my script the lawyer is stalked by Carlos the drug cartel king. The lawyer is being intimidated to lose certain cases by other learners.They still have reasonable doubt on hulu even though I told them it was infringement through email. Scenes and logline from script are the same. I would never be able to come out as a screenwriter because so many characteristics and similarities are in reasonable doubt. I gave my script to shonda rhimes raamla mohamed boss and she passed it to raamla. I have evidence I gave it to her boss on her website.Depression, loss of income, and not being able to come out with a tv show because they took my major concepts in reasonable doubt. When your in the entertainment industry you cant even have no similarities. I have writers guild concept as well.No claim certified, no orders to amendakiya finleynoneraamla mohamedClaim
23-CCB-0086infringementA 1971 motion picture concerning Dracula and the Frankenstein monster released by Independent-International Pictures Corp. and directed by Al Adamson. The film also starred Lon Chaney, J.Carrol Naish, Angelo Rossito, Zandor Vorkov among others.Mainsail LLC., dba Shoreline Entertainment illegally exhibited a pirated copy of Independent-International Pictures copyrighted motion picture, Dracula vs Frankenstein on their YouTube channel entitled THE STREAM https://www.youtube.com/@The_Stream. The illegal, derivative copy that was exhibited on THE STREAM had replaced Independent-International Pictures Corp's logo with a CHEESY FLIX logo in front of the credits. Shoreline requested we remove the copyright strike from their YouTube channel and we told them we don't negotiate with known infringers since they claim they licensed the film from another party called CHEESY FLICKS, who has been infringing and illegally selling digital downloads of Independent-International's copyrighted motion picture Dracula vs Frankenstein on their website, https://www.cheezymovies.com/product-page/dracula-vs-frankenstein-digital. In turn, SHORELINE / THE STREAM has placed a counter notification to our copyright claim and claim they aired IIP's film by mistake. They failed to do any diligence on the rights to the picture and are now suggesting Independent-International Pictures Corp is trying to extort them. Totally false. Independent-InternIndependent-International Pictures Corp. has been in the film business for over 50 years and has been actively preserving and distributing its copyrighted motion pictures with legitimate licenses and sales in theaters, television and home entertainment to companies like MGM, Severin Films and Vinegar Syndrome. Independent-International Pictures Corp. does not want its films exploited in digital as it explores a potential sale of its rights and assets or a guaranteed license fee it deems acceptable. Continued infringements like those on YouTube by companies like Shoreline's Stream Channel, and websites like Cheesy Flicks Entertainment aka CHEESY MOVIES, makes it extremely burdensome and nearly impossible for Independent-International Pictures Corp. to maintain and monetize its exclusive rights as it explores a sale or exclusive license of its intellectual properties and assets like Dracula vs Frankenstein. Independent-International Pictures Corp. is seeking injunctive relief against Mainsail LLC., dba Shoreline Entertainment and their Stream service, as well as Cheesy Flicks Entertainment dba as Cheesy Movies from copying, distributing and exhibiting its copyrighted motion pictNo claim certified, no orders to amendSamuel M. ShermannoneMainsail LLC, dba: Shoreline EntertainmentOrder Granting Request to Link Samuel M. Sherman, Mr. with the Samuel M. Sherman party
23-CCB-0085infringementWord cloud in the shape of a seed, based on my researchIn a for-profit posting on a for-profit site, Paul Thacker displayed my artwork without my permission. It was not used for a discussion of the work, it was a personal attack, harassment, and misrepresentation of the work. Although it is behind a subscription wall, Substack made me get a subscription to view it in situ. It was definitely on the page, and did not link to the source of the work where full context is possible to examine. A DMCA takedown was initiated as a result.I want the work to be taken down and not used by the infringer now or in the future. I had to pay a subscription fee to view the work and I want that repaid to me. Infringer's profits from his subscription should also be included in the relief. In addition, reputational damage from the misrepresentation of this work should be included.No claim certified, no orders to amendMary E MangannoneSubstack DMCA ProcessingNone
23-CCB-0084infringementMusic sound recordingIllegal publication on the following YouTube URLLoss of monetization. Loss of profits. Damage to artist. Damage to artists official original YouTube Channel. Damage to reputation.Awaiting amendment/certificationWorld Media Alliance Label incnoneYouTube, LLCOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0083infringementMusic sound recordingIllegal publication on the following YouTube URL.Loss of monetization. Loss of profits. Damage to artist. Damage to artists official original YouTube Channel. Damage to reputation.Awaiting amendment/certificationWorld Media Alliance Label incnoneYouTube, LLCOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0082infringementMusic sound recordingIllegal publication on the following YouTube URL.Loss of monetization. Loss of profits. Damage to artist. Damage to artists official original YouTube Channel. Damage to reputation.Awaiting amendment/certificationWorld Media Alliance Label incnoneYouTube, LLCOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0081infringementdiagram of a deviated septumDiagram Image of a deviated nasal septum from original work of my own from my sinus surgery brochure which was stolen from my website, www. Seattle-rhinoplasty.com under copyright protection by the US Library of Congress.My original sinus anatomy artwork was posted on my website in 2014, and copyright registrations were performed by my Company with the US Library of Congress before posting. This is a sinus diagram demonstrating a deviated nasal septum.Respondent is selling marketing research services for Ear Noe and Throat equipment suppliers to the public with my sinus image located on their website and profiting from their report with my diagram on their websiteNo claim certified, no orders to amendWilliam Portuese, MD, Aesthetic Associates, Inc P.S.noneWilliam Portuese, MDClaim
23-CCB-0080infringementa songThe infringing individual (Defendant) copied, reproduced, remixed, repurposed, created derivative copies, displayed, and redistributed multiple musical works, sound recordings, and video works owned by the Plaintiff. Defendant uploaded and displayed them on his/her public Youtube channel without permission or authorization from the copyright owner (Plaintiff). Defendant also misrepresented the Plaintiff and Plaintiff's work by pretending to be affiliated with Plaintiff and misusing Plaintiff's brand and image. Defendant infringed on Plaintiff's work no fewer than 42 times. Plaintiff filed copyright claims urging Defendant to remove Defendant's more than 42 infringing works. Defendant then filed dozens of copyright counterclaims, forcing Plaintiff into unwanted litigation.As a result of Defendant remixing and reposting Plaintiff’s songs online, Plaintiff has suffered harm in the form of lost profits from unauthorized use of Plaintiff’s creative work, damage to Plaintiff’s reputation as an entertainer/musician/entertainment company, and loss of control over the distribution and monetization of Plaintiff’s intellectual property. Plaintiff further claims that Defendant's actions devalued the original songs/music videos and caused harm to Plaintiff’s ability to commercially exploit the work as Plaintiff intended. Plaintiff is seeking injunctive relief prohibiting Defendant from continuing to use Plaintiff’s copyrighted material or image on Youtube and other platforms, as well as keeping the content at issue from being reinstated to YouTube by Youtube. Plaintiff also respectfully requests that the Court award all costs and expenses associated with this action, including reasonable attorney's fees, to be paid by the Defendant. Plaintiff contends that Defendant's actions, including but not limited to copyright infringement, have caused substantial harm and damage to Plaintiff's rights as a copyright owner. Plaintiff further argues that the Defendant's No claim certified, no orders to amendFat Damon RecordsnoneAlbert J EvansOrder Denying Request to Link Ray Johnson with the Ray Johnson and Fat Damon Records parties
23-CCB-0079-DMCA-noninfringementNANABecause of Roann Celis-Capistrano's continued harassment, it caused severe distress, embarassment, pain and suffering from being wrongly accused of copyright infringement. My video has been taken down for 2 weeks so my audience was properly informed on how to calculate their retirement.No claim certified, no orders to amendElaine Angelica LinganoneROANN CELIS-CAPISTRANOClaim
23-CCB-0078infringementSound recordingThe company took my song from YouTube (published on February 28, 2020) and made a new song with my vocals and the beat without my permission.I did not receive any credit because the stolen material contains my sound recordings; therefore, many listeners have been misled into thinking that this company is the original song creator and is earning revenue from my sound recordings. There are many re-uploads on streaming platforms, and I, as an independent artist, am struggling to solve any copyright issues. I have contacted the other party, but they were not open to collaborating and solving this issue. I am seeking maximum relief because I was not asked to give any permission, and so this release was uploaded without my knowledge or consent. I also demand that this song be taken down from all streaming platforms or that my vocals be taken out of the release. I do not give anyone permission to use my vocals.No claim certified, no orders to amendOksana IvlevanoneBlack 17 MediaClaim
23-CCB-0077infringementNone givenTheo Hernandez uploaded the songs to his YouTube channel--Amor Música Cristiana--and claims ownership of sound recordings.Harm suffered: Undue use of sound recordings, partial loss of YouTube royalties, raising doubt of ownership before YouTube Copyright Department. Let it be clear before the CCB that Nancy Ramirez is registered as the sole owner and legal distributor of the content in question, and is represented in the YouTube environment solely by Link Representaciones (also known as Representaciones Internacionales). Relief: Formal certification of Nancy Ramirez as sole owner of master recordings so that YouTube will pull Theo Hernandez's infringing content.No claim certified, no orders to amendNancy C Ramirez GarcianoneTheo HernandezClaim
23-CCB-0076infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] to authorize the public exhibition of (1) the Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury II boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on February 22, 2020 and (2) the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 262: Charles Oliveira vs. Michael Chandler mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on May 15, 2021 (collectively the "Programs") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents The End Zone Bar & Grill, Inc., Sophal Laird, and Doug Thompson (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Claimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $30,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violations of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisThe End Zone Bar & Grill, Inc.Notice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0075infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury II boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on February 22, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents DSF Enterprises, Inc. and Darian S. Fuller (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Gloria’s Bar & Grill located at 8201 Pacific Avenue, Tacoma, WA 98408 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondent Darian S. Fuller is an individual who resides in the State of Washington and was a member, manager, officer and/or princClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisDSF Enterprises, Inc.Notice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0074infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury II boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on February 22, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Juan Eduardo Cuellar and Cintia Ivette Marquez-Chavez (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Micheladas El Patron located at 720 W. 8th Street, Suite G, Stockton, CA 95206 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondents are individuals who reside in the State of California and owned and operated the Establishment on tClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisJuan E. CuellarNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0073infringementA recorded songOn October 28, 2022 Rakeem Calief Myer, using the professional name “Roc Marciano” knowingly infringed on my copyrighted music and performed a live performance and created a video of the live performance for distribution on YouTube. Mr. Myer knowingly and intentionally did this, as he was fully aware that the song, he was sampling was written and fully copyrighted by me. The song of mine, that Mr. Myer sampled for his derivative product (Thugs Prayer) is entitled “Trip Thru Hell Part 1”. It is from my 1969 album entitled “Trip Thru Hell” (also released on a 1995 CD by Sundazed records and registered with the pre1972 recordings of the Library of Congress) It can also be located on our YouTube channel https://youtu.be/_mLkm1nMJXs The copyright for this song contained on the album was registered May 14, 2019. (attachment) Mr. Meyer committed this infringement knowing full well he had no right to perform this derivative he calls “Thugs Prayer” live and then place a video of the performance on YouTube. This infringement occurred just days after an attorney representing Mr. Myer failed to respond back to me after six months of negotiations failed to enabled Mr. Meyer to obtain a liI am seeking maximum statutory damages, the costs of this action and such other amounts as the Court deems proper and within the limit authorized by this Court. The respondent’s acts of infringement were not only willful, intentional, and purposeful, but also in complete disregard of and indifference to claimants’ rights. Accordingly, claimant is entitled to judgment in its favor and against each respondent, jointly and severally, for statutory damages, in the discretion of the Board, plus interest, and costs. By failing to obtain Petitioner’s authorization to use the Copyrighted Work or to compensate Petitioner for their various uses, The respondent has avoided payment of license fees and other financial costs associated with obtaining permission to exploit the Copyrighted Work, as well as the restrictions that Petitioner is entitled to and would place on any such exploitation as conditions for Petitioner’s permission, including the right to deny permission altogether The respondent has certainly gained an undeserved and unknown amount of revenue/profit from the derivative by exploiting my original music. This has caused an immeasurable amount of damage, damaging credibilitClosedKenneth D ErwinnoneRahkeim MeyerOrder Dismissing Claim
23-CCB-0072infringementNone givenClaimant Chase Plastic Services, Inc. ("Chase Plastics") is a Michigan corporation that specializes in providing engineering and commodity thermoplastics for small to medium-sized applications to customers, and, at a considerable expense, has produced marketing and advertising materials for its various products and services. Chase Plastics is the owner of all copyrights in, and has submitted copyright registration applications for, a number of marketing and advertising documents, including the following works at issue (the “Copyrighted Works”): Redefining Resin Distribution, Technical Service, The Chase Plastics Story, Recreational Outdoor and Firearms, and Website Content. See, Exhibits 1-5. Upon information and belief, Mr. Abhimanyu Khanna, a former employee of Chase Plastics, and President of California Plastics, reproduced, distributed, displayed, and/or altered the Copyrighted Works on California Plastics website at https://california-plastics.com/ and on various social media platforms, including LinkedIn (the “Infringing Works”). See, Exhibits 6, 7 and 8. Respondents’ Infringing Works are virtually identical to, substantially similar to, or derivative of Claimant’s CopyrigAs a result of Respondents’ actions described above, Claimant has been directly damaged, and is continuing to be damaged, by the unauthorized distribution and public display of the Infringing Works. Defendant has never accounted to or otherwise paid Plaintiff for its use of the Copyrighted Work. Claimant Chase Plastics is entitled to recover actual damages and profits or, in the alternative, statutory damages totaling the maximum allowed amount, and any additional measures that the Board deems appropriate.No claim certified, no orders to amendChase Plastic Services, Inc.Varnum LLPCalifornia PlasticsClaim
23-CCB-0071infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury II boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on February 22, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Mary Anne Dawson and Lynette G. Giglio (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Bottoms Up Bar & Grill located at 1672 Hammonton-Smartsville Road, Suite A, Marysville, CA 95901 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondents are individuals who reside in the State of California and owned and operated the Establishment oClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisMary A. DawsonNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0070infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury II boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on February 22, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents West Coast Soul LLC, Lavell Naquon Bynum, and Takela Corbitt (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as BlaqHaus NoHo located at 11671 Victory Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 91606 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondents Lavell Naquon Bynum and Takela Corbitt are individuals who reside in the State of California and were mClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisWest Coast Soul LLCNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0069-DMCANANA1. A sharp drop in sales. We sell this product on Amazon and have a solid monthly sales of about $18,000. Since the respondent put the infringing product on the shelves, the two products are very similar, and it is easy for consumers to mistake them for the same one. Now our monthly sales have dropped to about 7000USD per month. 2. Double the cost of promotion. Due to the increased competition, our advertising expenses have also increased a lot. Before, the monthly advertising cost was about 600 US dollars per month, and now it costs about 1100 US dollars per month per month. 3. Increased management costs. Due to the increase in competition, the exposure of our products has also decreased accordingly. We can only ask the operation to spend more time to improve the position of the products on the website, so as to ensure that more consumers can see our products. In response to this situation, we have complained to the respondent on the Amazon e-commerce platform. Amazon temporarily deleted the link of the respondent, but the other party counter-claimed on February 6, 2023 and asked Amazon to restore the link within 10 working days. If we do not submit a copy of the lawsuit by theNo claim certified, no orders to amendShenzhiyishoumaoyishenzhenyouxiangongsinoneguang zhou shi bo qing bo mao yi you xian gong sigalaxy plate copyright
23-CCB-0068infringementBroadcast of a basketball gameChris Schieman Media and Brunswick Community College Basketball co-own the rights to the live streaming and on-demand broadcasts of all Brunswick Community College Basketball home games. Chris Schieman Media, specifically, owns the broadcasting rights for an agreed upon amount of home games. On February 9th, 2023, New Rock Prep was notified they were not allowed to live stream the game taking place that evening, due to these rights. New Rock Prep was given notice prior to this date as well. In two different instances, New Rock Prep fraudulently and willfully violated copyright and broadcasting rights by Chris Schieman Media by live streaming, or otherwise posting video of the basketball game against Brunswick Community College, without permission from Chris Schieman Media. Chris Schieman Media contacted YouTube, and YouTube agreed, removing both videos that New Rock Prep posted.Chris Schieman Media is filing this claim to satisfy the requirements of a counter copyright notification sent to me by YouTube. I am not seeking monetary damages, only that my copyright and broadcasting rights remains protected.No claim certified, no orders to amendChris SchiemannoneAnthony IvoryClaim
23-CCB-0067infringementDramatic Work Music or Choreography ; Video and VoiceFebruary 12, 2023 Email: dionnevalentine@gmail.com YouTube Channel: (5) StellaRoseAllDay - YouTube Re: CEASE AND DESIST: Trademark Infringement #StellaRoseAllDay and my photo Because you neither requested nor received permission, your unauthorized copying and use of the work constitutes copyright infringement under 17 U.S. Code Title 17. Email: ______________   My name is Dionne Lang My Pseudo name is Stella Rose I am a true crime author and I report on crime. I have written two books: ‘Shattered Windows’ a memoir, and ‘HU$H Money’ the sequel. Both are copyrighted I have sent the forms. The third copyright is #stellaroseallday “FOR HIRE” the copyright office is sending me the paper copy. Dec 2022 is registered. I will send the paper copy as soon as I get it in the mail. Violation of Face and Voice Defamation of my character Not paying me to use my copyright. No agreement, No authorization from me. What more proof do you need that these people are spamming me and stalking me and threating me, it’s called Harassment. I have a report from the Miami-Dade FBI office. Ever since I started documenting the murder of Aaron Carter, his DX groupieLoss of income due and smear campain is damaging my professional reputation that I have been building since 2011.No claim certified, no orders to amendBuy From SammynoneStella R AllDayYouTubeLawsuit
23-CCB-0066infringement-DMCA-noninfringementA Glass orb filled with specific herbs, glitter and a fairy based on metaphysical propertiesMaking a derivative of my work as well as full defamation of character, harassment, incorrect statements, and cyber stalkingOverloads of personal phone call/hang ups, online negative comments from non purchasers of my own items overloaded on facebook and instagram by her followers after she became 'viral' and ongoing sent to my email in regards to her tiktok wave, stress, depression, lack of sales and ability to advertise, additional nerve and body pain and migraines exaserbated due to underlying condition, monetary relief and cease of creation derivatives of my items.No claim certified, no orders to amendMichelle MilanononeEliza DavisTake down notice from Etsy -EXAMPLE ONLY
23-CCB-0065infringementNone givenOur construction element paper plate, designed in September 2021, is an original creation of black and yellow color matching for architectural elements. Prior to this, the market was dominated by blue sky and white clouds background, plus yellow building site patterns. The above information can be found by searching for construction paper plate products on the Amazon e-commerce platform and confirming the release time. After the design is completed, we published it on the Amazon e-commerce platform on October 18, 2021. The product link is https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09JNX92Q9, everyone can visit and buy our products. After the design of our black and yellow architectural tableware is completed, in 2022, there are many imitated products on the market. The respondent is one of the imitators. The respondent - guang zhou shi bo qing bo mao yi you xian gong si owns and operates the online marketplace account identified by the https://www.amazon.com/sp?ie=UTF8&seller=A1QJFZNXCF3ZR1 and the Account Name Boqbo(“Online Marketplace”). The product (ASIN-B0BNZWRN2M) sold online in the above Amazon store plagiarized our product pattern design ideas, see below for details. InfringeIt infringes on our product design. Due to the high similarity in appearance, customers are prone to cognitive bias when they are sold on the same platform. On the premise that product quality cannot be guaranteed, it will have a certain impact on our brand and store reputation. Our monthly sales of this product are about 25,000 US dollars. Due to the infringement of the respondent, we have increased our investment in obtaining Amazon traffic and damaged our sales. Caused a loss of at least 25,000 US dollars. Since Amazon removed the other party's link, we have no way of finding out the profit the respondent made from the sale. We have complained to the respondent on the Amazon e-commerce platform, and Amazon has temporarily removed the respondent's link, but the other the respondent's counter-appeal requires Amazon to restore the link within 10 working days. We hope that the respondent will stop the infringing behavior, permanently delete their selling links, and promise not toinfringe our copyright again.No claim certified, no orders to amendShenzhiyishoumaoyishenzhenyouxiangongsinoneguang zhou shi bo qing bo mao yi you xian gong siClaim
23-CCB-0064infringementAERIAL OF HOUSTON SKYLINE FROM NORTHWESTMaking use of Jim Olive's (Photolive Inc.'s) copyrighted photographic image Aerial View of Downtown Houston at Dusk, and this use appears to be without license. The protected work appeared in the following location on the NDB website and could be seen in the link, https://ndbcpa.com/blog/entry/houston-texas-pci-dss-qsa-assessors-auditors-and-certificationCopyrighted photo use without a license; payment for the unlawful use or purchase of licensing for the infringement time period 9/10/19 thru 9/6/22 in the amount of $7500.00Awaiting amendment/certificationPhotolive Inc. dba Stockyard PhotosnoneNDB CPAOrder to Show Cause
23-CCB-0063infringementAerial evening view of Houston, Texas skyline from the Northwest with traffic on freeway in the foreground. Copyright © Jim Olive 2004 "ALL RIGHTS RESERVED"Making use of Jim Olive's copyrighted photographic image aerial view of downtown Houston at dusk, and this use appeared to be without license. The protected work appeared in the following location on the Raj for Houston website and could be seen in the enclosed link, https://www.rajforhouston.comCopyrighted photo use without a license; payment for the unlawful use or purchase of licensing for the infringement time period 01/01/2020 thru 09/13/2022 in the amount of $7500.00No claim certified, no orders to amendRaj for HoustonnoneRaj SalhotraClaim
23-CCB-0062infringementAERIAL OF HOUSTON SKYLINE FROM NORTHWESTMaking use of Jim Olive's (Photolive Inc.) copyrighted photographic image Aerial Houston Skyline at Dusk, and this use appeared to be without license. The protected work appeared in the following location on the Guardstone Property Management website and could be seen in the enclosed link, http://www.guardstonepm.com/Copyrighted photo use without a license; payment for the unlawful use or purchase of licensing for the infringement time period 12/03/2021 thru 12/30/2022 in the amount of $2500.00Awaiting amendment/certificationPhotolive Inc. dba Stockyard PhotononeGuardstone Property ManagementOrder to Show Cause
23-CCB-0061infringementAERIAL OF HOUSTON SKYLINE FROM NORTHWESTMaking use of Jim Olive's (Photolive's) copyrighted photographic image Aerial View of Downtown Houston at Dusk, and this use appeared to be without license. The protected work appeared in the following location on your website and could be seen in the enclosed link, https://www.masseyservices.com/pest-control/tx/houston during the infringement period.Copyrighted photo use without a license; payment for the unlawful use or purchase of licensing for the infringement time period 01 /2022 thru 12/2022 in the amount of $2,500.00Awaiting amendment/certificationPhotolive Inc. dba Stockyard PhotosnoneMassey ServicesOrder to Show Cause
23-CCB-0060infringementAerial evening view of Houston, Texas skyline from the Northwest with traffic on freeway in the foreground. Copyright © Jim Olive 2004 "ALL RIGHTS RESERVED"Making use of Jim Olive's (Photolive Inc.'s) copyrighted photographic image aerial view of downtown Houston at dusk, and this use appears to be without license. The protected work appeared in the following location on the Peggy West Properties website at https://peggywest.com/2015/08/Copyrighted photo use without a license; payment for the unlawful use or purchase of licensing for the infringement time period 8/15/2015 thru 9/12/2022 in the amount of $17,500.00Awaiting amendment/certificationPhotolive Inc. dba Stockyard PhotosnonePeggy West PropertiesOrder to Show Cause
23-CCB-0059infringementAerial evening view of Houston, Texas skyline from the Northwest with traffic on freeway in the foreground. Copyright © Jim Olive 2004 "ALL RIGHTS RESERVED"Making use of Jim Olive's (Stockyard Photo's) copyrighted photographic image (aerial view of downtown Houston at dusk), and this use appears to be without license. The protected work appears in the following location on the website (and can be seen in the enclosed link: https://downundapools.com/service-areas/houston-pool-builder/Copyrighted photo use without a license; payment for the unlawful use or purchase of licensing for the infringement time period 12/11 /21 - 09/12/2022 in the amount of $2500.00Awaiting amendment/certificationPhotolive, Inc. dba Stockyard PhotosnoneDownunda PoolsOrder to Show Cause
23-CCB-0058infringementCOWBOYS ON HORSEBACK WITH OIL RIGMaking use of Jim Olive's (Stockyard Phots's) copyrighted photographic image #ZW2LO8529 (cowboys with oil rig), and this use appears to be without license. The protected work appears in the following location on your website (and can be seen in the enclosed link): https://www.wessupply.com/about usCopyrighted photo use without a license; payment for the unlawful use or purchase of licensing for the infringement time period 8/16/2018 thru 9/5/2022 in the amount of $10,000.00.Awaiting amendment/certificationPhotolive, Inc. dba Stockyard PhotosAllied National Inc.Wes Supply LLCOrder to Show Cause
23-CCB-0057infringementPhotographs of items I sell in my Etsy shopThe respondent screenshotted my photographs and posted them without my consent in their shop on Etsy and Mercari. I filed an intellectual property infringement report with Etsy and Etsy deactivated the infringing listings. The respondent filed a counter notice. I am taking a legal action to seek a court order.As a result of the infringement, I suffered a significant loss in sales and I am seeking a compensation in the amount of $5,000No claim certified, no orders to amendElena JenkinsnoneAmanda SmithClaim
23-CCB-0056infringement-DMCAWork of the Performing Arts - Audiovisual WorksRespondent uploaded Claimant's video to YouTube without permission after being notified that this video was not authorized to be uploaded by creator of video. Respondent then knowingly misrepresented to YouTube that Respondent had rights to video. Claimant herein submits email evidence demonstrating that Respondent's bad faith in uploading video and then continuing to knowingly and falsely assert rights to the video.Claimant has had multiple offers from various entities, including Respondent, to purchase this video. Claimant has not sold rights to any entity to date. Nevertheless, Respondent uploaded and began profiting from video causing video to lose monetary value as a result. Claimant cannot sell exclusive rights to video when Respondent is already profiting off of it. Additionally, email evidence will show that Respondent is subject to bad faith misrepresentation pursuant to 17 USC 512(f).CertifiedHayley F BordesSolo practitionerViralSnareNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0055infringementThis work is a sound recording, ProductionIn May 2016, Fly Guy Entertainment committed copyright infringement by using my track "Wifin You Beat" without obtaining a proper license and distributing it on all digital service platforms (DSPs). Despite this, they have refused to compensate me for the use of the track.30,000No claim certified, no orders to amendLangston M ChildsnoneThomas IvansClaim
23-CCB-0054infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 247: Jon Jones vs. Dominick Reyes mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on February 8, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents The O Club, LLC and Shawn O’Day (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as The O Club located at 2025 White Mountain Parkway, North Conway, NH 03860 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondent Shawn O’Day is an individual who resides in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and wClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisThe O Club, LLCNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0053infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] to authorize the public exhibition of (1) the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 247: Jon Jones vs. Dominick Reyes mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on February 8, 2020 and (2) the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 248: Israel Adesanya vs. Yoel Romero mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on March 7, 2020 (collectively the "Programs") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Culebra Cigar Company LLC, Matthew McDavid, and Robert O’Neill (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $30,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violations of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisCulebra Cigar Company LLCNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0052infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 247: Jon Jones vs. Dominick Reyes mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on February 8, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondent Mohammad Azeem Farooq (the "Respondent") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Urban Skillet located at 5060 Lankershim Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 91601 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondent is an individual who resides in the State of California and was an owner and operator of the Establishment on thClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondent’s willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisMohammad A. FarooqNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0051infringementPicture of the claimant in a red shirt holding a white mug.The responded has posted the copyrighted work in YouTube videos and instagram videos and is monetizing the work without permission from or compensation to the claimant.Public shame and embarrassment. Emotional distress and trauma. Destruction of claimant's brand. Unauthorized monetization of claimant's intellectual property.No claim certified, no orders to amendTiffany BowdenAlex Nahai ESQ.Kaitlin SamuelsClaim
23-CCB-0050infringementYoutube video that was used without permissionThis person used my copyright content without my permission and used my video to try to humiliate me.Tried to ruin my brand as I have lost views and revenue because of this horrible act.No claim certified, no orders to amendlakevin DavisnoneGEORGE bookerClaim
23-CCB-0049infringementA songThe infringing individual copied, remixed, repurposed, and created derivative copies of 1 or more our musical works and uploaded them to his/her public Youtube channel. The infringing individual did this no fewer than 38 times.As a result of the defendant remixing and reposting our songs online, we have suffered harm in the form of lost profits from unauthorized use of our creative work, damage to our reputation as a musician, and loss of control over the distribution and monetization of our intellectual property. We further claim that the defendant's actions devalued the original song and caused harm to the our ability to commercially exploit the work as we intended.Awaiting amendment/certificationFat Damon RecordsnoneAlbert J EvansOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0048infringement-DMCAPaw Patrol Chase character with accompanying police car vehicleSpin Master Ltd. (“Spin Master”) is the owner and producer of the children’s television program PAW PATROL (the “Program”), which airs on Viacom International Inc.’s (“VII”) Nickelodeon network. The Program and its related characters, which include Chase, Marshall, Rocky, Rubble, and Skye (the “Characters”), have enjoyed exceptional success worldwide, and have become well-known to the public. The Characters, designs, and visual representations developed in connection with the Program are protected by copyright in the U.S. and throughout the world. Spin Master has obtained copyright registration certificates from the U.S. Copyright Office for each of the Characters, and for the PAW PATROL logo. See Exhibit 1. VII has the authority to enforce Spin Master’s copyright rights in and to the Program and Characters against infringement by third parties. Shirt Traveler LLC (“Shirt Traveler”) is, without authorization, selling and/or offering for sale apparel displaying unauthorized derivatives of the Program Characters and logo (the “Infringing Designs”) through Shirt Traveler’s website and Etsy storefront. See Exhibit 2. Each Infringing Design utilizes the same color scheme and occuShirt Traveler’s actions falsely suggest to both parents and children that apparel and other consumer products featuring the Infringing Designs are affiliated with, or approved and endorsed by, Spin Master and/or VII. Shirt Traveler continues to sell and/or offer for sale products featuring the Infringing Designs willfully, in knowing disregard and violation of Spin Master’s copyright rights. Spin Master and VII are entitled to recover actual damages and profits or, in the alternative, statutory damages totaling $30,000, and any other additional measures that the Board deems appropriate.Awaiting amendment/certificationViacom International Inc.noneShirt Traveler LLCOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0047infringementPhotograph of the colorful rocks on the shore of Lake Huron, with the lake in the backgroundRespondents accessed the photo online (probably Claimant's website), copied it illicitly, cropped it, then overlayed its own branding "Grunge" onto the photograph as well as "The Colorful Stones of Lake Huron," thereby creating a derivative work, then published it on its Facebook page where it was shared at least 70 times.For loss of control of the photograph; loss of license fee; loss of CMI/attribution, and false attribution to Grunge, Claimant seeks the maximum statutory damages permitted as well as attorney's fees for Respondent's bad faith in refusing to discuss settlement, forcing litigation.CertifiedMark GrafBurns the Attorney, Inc.7Hops.com, Inc., dba Static Media dba Grunge.comNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0046infringementPerspective view at sunset of Canal Street in downtown New Orleans. Red Streetcar in the foreground. Sheraton Hotel with bright Yellow and Red neon sign standing tall above all.Respondent swiped copyrighted work from Claimant's website and used it on its own. Intentionally, the respondent cropped off Claimant's copyright notice to hide it from image.Search statutory damages of $15000 and prompt removal of photo from all of Downtown Development District of New Orleans documents, website and servers.CertifiedAlfonso BrescianinoneDowntown Development District of New OrleansProof Of Service Signed.pdf
23-CCB-0045-DMCANANALoss of monetization. Loss of profits. Damage to artist. Damage to artists Damage to reputation.CertifiedDK Global IncnoneXtreme reflectives LLCNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0044infringementBlack and white image of Charters Street in the French Quarter of New Orleans under the rain at twilight . Wet metal benches in the foreground.Swiped my copyrighted photo from one of my websites and used it on its company website instead of inquiring for a license to use it legally. Respondent cropped out my copyright notice from it. It was done willingly, obviously.I do not want my copyrighted works to appear on a construction company's website, I do not want to be affiliated with it. I mainly sell and license my works for editorial and private galleries and I very scrupulously select whom I want to license my photography to. I am looking for statutory damages of $15000 and would like the infringer to stop their activities.CertifiedAlfonso BrescianinoneAcadia Renovations LLCProof of Service Filled Out.pdf
23-CCB-0043-noninfringementNANANACertifiedNina Designs, Ltd.Donahue Fitzgerald LLPMargaret A SkempWaiver of Service
23-CCB-0042infringementShort FilmThe film was posted on YouTube without my consent.I request that the film be removed from YouTube and that David Newman / ASPD Films stop posting this film on YouTube.CertifiedDominic HaxtonnoneDavid NewmanWaiver of Service
23-CCB-0041infringementPhoto of Omni Hotel Charlottesville, VAunlicensed use of stockyard.com image 20031219-SKAD1049 on Amstar's website from 7/03/17 thru 9/14/2022.Failure to license the photo image and illegal use of said image during a period expaning 7/03/17 thru 9/14/2022. Economic damage has been determined as $12,500.00Awaiting amendment/certificationPhotolive, Inc. dba StockyardPhotosnoneAmstarOrder to Show Cause
23-CCB-0040infringementNone givenOur construction element paper plate, designed in September 2021, is an original creation of black and yellow color matching for architectural element. Prior to this, the market was dominated by blue sky and white clouds background, plus yellow building site patterns. The above information can be found by searching for construction paper plate products on the Amazon e-commerce platform and confirming the release time. After the design is completed, we have published it on the Amazon e-commerce platform on October 18, 2021. The product link is: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09JNX92Q9?th=1, everyone can visit and buy our products. After the design of our black and yellow architectural tableware is completed, in 2022, there are many imitated products on the market. The respondent is one of the imitators. The respondent - jinhuashixichunzhizhipinyouxiangongsi owns and operates the online marketplace account identified by the Amazon account amazon.com/sp?seller=A3QDRZFO6775LJ and the Account Name tangpiao (“Online Marketplace”). The product (ASIN-B0BJQGNS89) sold online in the above Amazon store plagiarized our product pattern design ideas, see below for details. InfringemeOur monthly sales of this product are about 25,000 US dollars. Due to the infringement of the respondent, we have increased our investment in obtaining Amazon traffic and damaged our sales. Caused a loss of at least 25,000 US dollars. Since Amazon removed the other party's link, we have no way of finding out the profit the respondent made from the sale. We have complained to the respondent on the Amazon e-commerce platform, and Amazon has temporarily removed the respondent's link, but the other the respondent's counter-appeal requires Amazon to restore the link within 10 working days. We hope that the respondent will stop the infringing behavior, permanently delete their selling links, and promise not to infringe our copyright again.Awaiting amendment/certificationShenzhiyishoumaoyishenzhenyouxiangongsinonejinhuashixichunzhizhipinyouxiangongsiOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0039infringementCompletely new arrangement/recording of a song to support a vocal track.I was asked to produce music for different projects in exchange for fair pay and receiving the proper credit and royalties. I shared the audio files in good faith but we never got to sign any agreement. I received some payment. The amount was decided by the client without asking for an invoice. I received them as a sign of appreciation for all the work I had been doing and I believed a conversation and agreement signing was pending. The client has released and taken credit for my work.1)The prominent harm has been the stress added to my life because of this unfair treatment. It has been a constant source of anxiety that has been time-consuming and negatively impacted my life. 2)Not receiving credit for my work does not allow me to grow and receive more significant work opportunities. 3)Not including me in the mixing and mastering stages of the songs I arranged led to subpar audio quality that misrepresents my vision. 4)I have not received fair compensation for the time spent producing these tracks. Not being included in any kind of royalties deprives me of having a chance to get compensated fairly. I am looking to receive credit for the work I did and to receive the royalty payments that belong to me as the creator of the music. I believe that creating 100% of the music means that I should own a considerable amount of the master recording. I understand that everything is negotiable, but a 50% split sounds fair to me.Awaiting amendment/certificationDiego M GarcianoneAbraham QuintanillaAmended Claim
23-CCB-0038infringementVisual drawing artwork of a sports car.I mailed my artwork to the Corvette National Museum.In 2020 General Motors introduced the all new Corvette C8 Stingray that looks very similar to my visual artwork.I did not give permission or authorization for it to be used.The all new Corvette Z06, the new E-Ray are all some form of reproduced or copy from my visual artwork.General Motors was working on a Zora project which was cancelled after I mailed my artwork to the Corvette National Museum.The Zora project does not look my artwork.My artwork is unique and it's obvious and no coincidence General Motors used my design.I have reason to believe someone from the Corvette National Museum gave General Motors my artwork without my permission.My visual artwork is copyright at the copyright office in Washington,D.C.I have rights that was violated and I should be compensated fairly.Awaiting amendment/certificationJermaine SimmonsnoneThe Corvette National MuseumOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0037infringementComposite image incorporating public domain image with type treatment that reads "OBSIDIAN Eros, Hypnos and Thanatos"Respondents were issued a cease and desist letter to stop using claiment's artwork for merchandise and online use, on or around 8/20/22. Claimant began process of registering copyright for the artwork on 10/26/22. Respondents continued to use claimant's artwork to sell merchandise and online products without permission or compensation, as well as create derivatives and misrepresent the authorship of the artwork.Claimant has suffered financially: paying for legal costs and from not being compensated for sales of products bearing his artwork. Claimant, who is a self-employed graphic designer, has also had his reputation tarnished in the community in which his client base is rooted, by having his artwork falsely misrepresented as being that of other artists. Claimant is seeking relief in the form of minimum statutory damages of $750 per work infringed.Awaiting amendment/certificationCharles OsuchowskinoneTyler F Lewis, MrAmended Claim
23-CCB-0036infringementThe melody is the same as Havana.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roYs9arHUQs listen to this song which was written in the middle of 1950s and compare it to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCjNJDNzw8Y havana, by Giorgi Tsabadze as you can see here https://gmi.ge/portfolio-items/giorgi-gogi-tsabadze/?lang=en.If you play the song Havana and Kucha-Kucha Alublebs you can see that the melody is the exact same, now this artist has passed away and isn't getting any praise for his wonderful work of art and yet Havana is one of the top songs and clams originality.Awaiting amendment/certificationMIRIANI IREMADZEnoneKarla CC EstrOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0035infringementVideocassette (VHS) featuring comedy performanceCOPYRIGHT: Comedy Spotlight Productions, Inc. (“Claimant”) is the beneficial owner of the copyright of the motion picture titled “One Night with Dice” (hereinafter “the Work”). (See U.S. Copyright Registration No. PA0000409262; March 16, 1989) BACKGROUND OF THE WORK: The Work is an approximately 46-minute video featuring a recording of a live stand-up comedy performance by a Comedian. Taped at Philadelphia’s Comedy Factory Outlet in 1986, it is a rare recording from the early stage of the Comedian’s career before he went on to achieve national name recognition. Upon initial release by Vestron Video (then a subsidiary of Vestron, Inc.), the Work reached #2 on the Billboard Video Chart - bested only by a video release from Sir Paul McCartney himself. This instant success was remarkable considering the Work’s VHS list price at the time ($59.99) and a complete absence of any promotional and marketing activities to generate audience interest in the Work. Upon expiration of the agreement between Claimant and Vestron Video in 2002, Rhino Entertainment Co. (“Rhino”), a subsidiary of Warner Bros., quickly stepped forward to acquire distribution rights to the Work. In 2009,Respondents' incorporation of the Work's recorded performance of an entire joke in Episode 3 of the Series does not amount to Fair Use. Hence, Respondents have infringed on Claimant's copyright. Claimant seeks $15,000.00 in damages.CertifiedComedy Spotlight Productions, Inc.Cognition IP, P.C.Store on Sunset LLCNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0034infringementMusic sound recordingIllegal publication on the following YouTube URL.Loss of monetization. Loss of profits. Damage to artist. Damage to artists official original YouTube Channel. Damage to reputation.Awaiting amendment/certificationWorld Media Alliance Label incnoneYouTube, LLCOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0033infringementMusic sound recordingIllegal publication on the following YouTube URL.Loss of monetization. Loss of profits. Damage to artist. Damage to artists official original YouTube Channel. Damage to reputation.Awaiting amendment/certificationWorld Media Alliance Label incnoneYouTube, LLCOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0032infringementPhotograph of offshore oil rig in the ocean with spilled oil in the foreground water.Respondent is the owner of the South Florida Times and maintains a website at www.sftimes.com (the “SFT Website”). On January 25, 2020, Claimant discovered that beginning on or about January 4, 2020, Respondent reproduced, distributed, and displayed Claimant’s copyrighted photograph of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon - BP Gulf oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in connection with Respondent’s publication or republished an article titled "LOOKING DOWN ON A DECADE: SATELLITE IMAGES TELL THE STORIES," on the SFT Website, and possibly elsewhere. Plaintiff’s photograph is not only used without her knowledge or permission, Respondent incorrectly attributes credit for Plaintiff’s photograph to Pinterest.com, despite the presence of Claimant’s authorship credit when the photograph was first published on an authorized third-party website, with an authorship credit indicating Julie Dermansky as the author, and despite the fact that Respondent knew or should have known that Pinterest is not the owner of the vast majority of the content posted to its website. The claimant believes Respondent knowingly failed to include credit to Claimant in order to conceal its own infringement and/or to induce,$15,000 - Statutory damages - Lost license fees/royalties - Disgorgement of Respondent’s profits - Omitted attribution induced, facilitated, and encouraged further downstream infringementCertifiedJulie DermanskyLeichtman Law PLLCBeatty Media, LLCNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0031infringementPhotograph of Lake Stevens Food Bank GroundbreakingRespondents used Claimant's photograph in a campaign mailer Respondents mailed to voters in support of Respondent Gary Petershagen's campaign for re-election to the Lake Stevens City Council without Claimant's knowledge or authorization.Claimant seeks monetary damages not to exceed $8,000 as a licensing fee.CertifiedCasey StromDuff Law PLLCGary PetershagenWaiver of Service
23-CCB-0030infringementMusic trackIllegal publication on the following iTunes URL.Loss of monetization. Loss of profits. Damage to artist. Damage to artists official original music publishing. Damage to reputation.Awaiting amendment/certificationWorld Media Alliance Label incnoneApple Inc.Order to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0029infringementMusic VideoIllegal publication on the following YouTube URL.Loss of monetization. Loss of profits. Damage to artist. Damage to artists official original YouTube Channel. Damage to reputation.Awaiting amendment/certificationWorld Media Alliance Label incnoneYouTube, LLCOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0028infringementMusic VideoIllegal publication on the following YouTube url.Loss of monetization. Loss of profits. Damage to artist. Damage to artists official original YouTube Channel. Damage to reputation.Awaiting amendment/certificationWorld Media Alliance Label incnoneYouTube, LLCOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0027infringementMusic VideoIllegal publication on the following YouTube URL.Loss of monetization. Loss of profits. Damage to artist. Damage to artists official original YouTube Channel. Damage to reputation.Awaiting amendment/certificationWorld Media Alliance Label incnoneYouTube, LLCOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0026infringement-DMCAPet parents on tv pets on tv motion picture charitable givingUsed pics published Copyright and trademark with permission picture name information belongs to me as I am on tvDefamation reputation Risk harmClosedDan WaldennoneThe Georgia Gazette, LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
23-CCB-0025infringementTrade nameMr. Dossey is using my trade name to redirect to his website, creating sales at my expense.Rather than receiving these inquiries and customers myself, Mr. Dossey is taking these leads. I would like him to cease and desist, and to compensate me for customers yielded by this redirect.ClosedKevin BachhubernoneAll things bugs llcOrder Closing Case
23-CCB-0024infringement33 RPM Soul by Michelle Shockedunauthorized recording of live performance creating a derivative work of unlicensed compositions creating an sync reproduction of unlicensed compositionsmy reputation and integrity have been maligned as a result of my reasonable assertion of copyright protections. The relief I am seeking is the cost of filing this claim and a meaningful apologyCertifiedMichelle ShockednoneLaw RocksNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0023infringementProfessional photograph of a kitchenMr. Vogts is a professional real estate photographer. US LA used his work to promote its construction and remodeling business without seeking a license to use that work. Mr. Vogts had his licensing agent reach out to US LA in June 2022. In response US LA removed the work from its website and Yelp page, but has otherwise refused to communicate with Mr. Vogts or offer any compensation for the use of that work.Lost licensing fees; statutory damages.Awaiting amendment/certificationBrandon VogtsDoniger / Burroughs PCUS LA Home Remodeling, Inc.Amended Claim
23-CCB-0022infringementartwork, tarot cards deck with registrated text and photographsShe/he/they use of works protected by copyright without permission for usage where such permission selling on Amazon: ASIN: B0BNL4ZLD3 Title: STENDA Tarot Cards Beginners Deck: Rider Beginner Waite Card Set with Guidebook Large Original Tarot Meanings on Them - 78 Classic Giant Size Decks - Reading Pretty Jumbo Kit Astrology Keywords We did a test buy, and plagiarism on 98% of the text, and 23 % for photographs.2% of texts was rephrased.Along with a staggering amount of lost revenue, and the impact of piracy on our brand. It also took a toll on our reputation and brand image. We got several complaints about these replica.ClosedNataliia Vereinanoneguo zhong weiOrder Dismissing Claim
23-CCB-0021infringementGraphic Art PrintMany listings are stolen of pending copyrighted work and other works not yet copyrighted or pending copyright. Not only are the artworks stolen but very blatantly stolen. Listings and mockup photos that display the photos are the exact same. The titles where you write what the product/ design is are identical.Loss of sales and infringement of pending copyrighted graphic art prints. A DMCA filed through etsy where they removed the stolen art prints that were for sale. After etsy removed their art prints they then wrongfully reinstated the stolen artwork back onto their storefront and are continuing to sale them. Another claim with etsy was issued as of today, January 18, 2023 and is pending. Identical art photos, art designs, as well as titles are identical. Tried to resolve through etsy with a DMCA filing. Then wrote a cease and desist that is currently being sent to them. This was the last resort.Awaiting amendment/certificationThe Velaris Company LLCnoneJustina BeagnyamOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0020infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 246: Conor McGregor vs. Donald “Cowboy” Cerrone mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on January 18, 2020, the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 247: Jon Jones vs. Dominick Reyes mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on February 8, 2020, and the Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury II boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on February 22, 2020 (the "Programs") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit any of the Programs in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Tilly Jane’s, LLC and Lucas Ward (collectively theClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $30,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violations of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisTilly Jane's, LLCWaiver of Service - Tilly Jane's
23-CCB-0019infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 246: Conor McGregor vs. Donald “Cowboy” Cerrone mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on January 18, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents The Talent Club, Inc. and Kandice Daly (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as The Talent Club located at 114 Talent Avenue, Talent, OR 97540 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondent Kandice Daly is an individual who resides in the State of Louisiana and wClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisThe Talent Club, Inc.Waiver of Service - Kandice Daly
23-CCB-0018infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 246: Conor McGregor vs. Donald “Cowboy” Cerrone mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on January 18, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Ramirez-Jimenez, LTD., Maria Jimenez, and Jose Ramirez (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Ramirez Mexican Restaurant & Store located at 5105 Capitol Blvd., Suite C, Tumwater, WA 98501 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondents Maria Jimenez and Jose RaClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisRamirez-Jimenez LTD.Waiver of Service - Maria Jimenez
23-CCB-0017infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 246: Conor McGregor vs. Donald “Cowboy” Cerrone mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on January 18, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Koozie’s Daiquiri & Sports Bar, LLC and Kimberly Primeaux (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Koozie’s Drive Thru Daiquiri & Sports Bar located at 2622 Highway 14 E., Lake Charles, LA 70607 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondent Kimberly Primeaux is Claimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisKoozie's Daiquiri & Sports Bar, LLCService Packet - Kimberly Primeaux
23-CCB-0016infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 246: Conor McGregor vs. Donald “Cowboy” Cerrone mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on January 18, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents LNH, LLC, Lori Harmon and Neal Harmon (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Burlington Pizza/The Barn located at 716 S. Michigan Street, Burlington, IN 46915 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondents Lori Harmon and Neal Harmon are individuals who resideClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisLHN, LLCWaiver of Service - Lori Harmon
23-CCB-0015infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 246: Conor McGregor vs. Donald “Cowboy” Cerrone mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on January 18, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Rio’s Pizza Inc., Clara J. Rio, and John Rio (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Rio’s Pizza located at 1949 Durfee Avenue, South El Monte, CA 91733 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondents Clara J. Rio and John Rio are individuals who reside in the SClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisRio's Pizza Inc.Waiver of Service - Rio's Pizza
23-CCB-0014infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 246: Conor McGregor vs. Donald “Cowboy” Cerrone mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on January 18, 2020 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents J. Street Holdings LLC and Yvette D. Prindle (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Mountain Mike’s Pizza located at 606 J Street, Marysville, CA 95901 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondent Yvette D. Prindle is an individual who resides in the State ofClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisJ. Street Holdings LLCWaiver of Service - J. Street Holdings
23-CCB-0013infringementA chevron maze textile patternExact copies of the designs were sold by the respondent using an Amazon store.lost sales due to duplicate articles. Seeking an injunction and damages of $29800.00ClosedTJ&A GlobalGlobalwide IP IncSubodh Kumar GuptaOrder Dismissing Claim
23-CCB-0012infringementPhotograph of Dandelion Seed Pendant NecklaceMy photograph DSC_0046.JPG has been posted on Pinterest by Nano Kim at Oswin West to promote and advertise their product.As a small business owner, I depend upon the repeat sales of my loyal customers. These customers have recognized my photography and product and have been duped into buying an inferior product from Nano Kim at Oswin West. This has caused me to lose money from these would be transactions.Awaiting amendment/certificationContina PiersonnoneNano KimAmended Claim
23-CCB-0011infringementAnimation TV Program Cow and Chicken and I am WeiselWarner Bross send to David Feiss a document, to sign and revoke my rights. I never received that document nor I ever signed. They knew I would never sign and they intentionally forge my signature.Uncollected royalties unknown the amount. In 2009 I got a court order that granted me 35% of the copyright. Warner keep ignoring my rights.ClosedPilar MenendeznoneWarner Bross EntertainmentOrder Dismissing Claim
23-CCB-0010infringementVisual MaterialThey have taken photos that are copyrighted from multiple music covers and included them in these Instagram posts with a falsified story as they are featuring the wrong individual. The last post, the artist rapping on this song does not own creative control of this beat. They were not authorized to use my beat. They did not pay and this Instagram creator is publishing this content.The relief sought such as damages suffered as a result of the infringement and any profits of the infringer that are attributable to the infringement and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. They have utilized a copyrighted photo to publish a false story using the wrong person as their image.Awaiting amendment/certificationMatt Tanganonechicago_hits3Order to Amend Noncompliant Claim
23-CCB-0009infringementMY BOOKIngram spark distributing my book to book vendors titled as THE SECRET AGENDA BY FELICIA WILLIAMS to book vendors in Europe and Asia even though i had cancelled printing services with Ingram spark in jury 2020, and amazon selling my book STRANGERS IN THE BLOCK on line as ebook after i had cancelled with Amazon in August 2022 and cancellation was confirmed by AmazonI HAVE BEEN DENIED THE PROCEEDS FROM THE SALES OF MY BOOK THIS HAS HAD A GREAT IMPACT ON MY PERSON WHEN EVER I REMEMBER SEEING MY BOOK ON BOOK VENDOR SITES I ADVERTISED WITH A PRICE TAG AND I AM NOT AWARE OF THIS, I WILL BE SO DISTURBED EMOTIONALLY AND I AM SEEKING FINANCIAL COMPENSATION ON THIS ISSUE.No claim certified, no orders to amendFELICIA C WILLIAMSnoneINGRAM SPARKClaim
23-CCB-0008infringementA daytime view of Manhattan skyline, financial district, taken from a helicopter.The photograph is displayed on the homepage of Precision Test & Balance, approximately 1/2 screen size https://ptbny.com/Licensing images is an integral part of my business. Not only did I lose the revenue from this particular license, but potential licenses from other companies, such as competing companies of PTB or other companies in the New York metro area, that would not want to license the same image due to it being on PTB's website.CertifiedGeorge SteinmetznonePrecision Test & BalanceNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
23-CCB-0007infringement-DMCAdramatic acting revolving around a fictitious situation involving fictitious voicemail recordingsThis individual publicly displayed, distributed and “performed” (via audio playback through the video) the work only I own the copyright to.The market value of the audio performance has substantially lowered due to so many parties hearing it and I can no longer resell the recording. I am not seeking financial relief, however I request that this individual stop stealing my audio and video works (and the works of others - such as my associate Controlla aka Kerissa DiBenedetto.ClosedAlexandra MayersnoneMyka WallaceOrder Dismissing Claim
23-CCB-0006infringement-DMCABlog postsHome gain has received several notices from me regarding their publication of my work and also indexing my name. Yesterday upon seeing these links again I was able to log into an old account. The contact information for Keller Williams Chapel Hill using my license number. Keller Williams was named in a legal matter in 2015 and my lawyer excused them from the mattet without my knowledge. I was able to remove the Keller Williams contact info and update the profile but there appears to be a second profile on their new website 2017 forward that I cannot access.I was put out of business denied access to my top ranjed blog. This resulted in a decade of lost income early retirement reduce Social Security benefits PTSD and anxiety disorder.ClosedMarie C ScheuringnoneHomegain.com, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
23-CCB-0005infringementWebsite intellectual property literature textLoss of analytical traffic, and loss of customer interaction due to confusion associated with duplicated content. Deliberately misplaced certain wording to deceive intellectual property thieves to aid in the process of retrieving our intellectual property stolen. Search engine optimization caused a decrease in web flow.$29,000 worth of damagesAwaiting amendment/certificationThe Bin MennoneJuan DIAZ-CHAVARRIAAmended Claim
23-CCB-0004infringement-DMCAMusic VideoThey have taken portions of each video listed and put it on YouTube, Patreon, and TikTok to promote numerous documentaries they have created. I have submitted successful YouTube copyright strikes that they have taken down but they still continue to mass distribute my videos on other platforms and are now appealing this on YouTube. This creator is associating our music video footage with their documentaries without any type of confirmation or consent from us. They have even went as far as removing our logos and placing their logo on the infringing videos essentially attempting to repackage our already copyrighted music video footage. There is blatant false and unactual information throughout these documentaries. Ultimately, the lack of credit and the altering of our footage is the biggest issue. The respondent frivolously stated to YouTube in an email stating "I have a good faith belief that the material identified in the Notice of Infringement was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled." after being informed of Complainant's prior rights on the copyrighted work.Loss of revenue and reputation as they have monetized my copyrighted graphical & musical works. Actual damages suffered sought as a result of the infringement and any profits the infringer gained through these videos that were available online for up to one year.No claim certified, no orders to amendBrian JohnsonnoneChicagoScene88Claim
23-CCB-0003infringementA harlequin Great Dane jumping over a baby gate/fence with the caption "Getting ready for the Olympics"Petco illegally downloaded my short motion picture and used it on their corporately owned Pupbox social media account without my permission.On April 2nd, 2021, Petco/Pupbox intently stole my content from the Instagram platform to use for their personal gain on their own social media platform. I sent a message to Pupbox via direct message on Instagram dated April 2nd, 2021. They were informed that they did not have permission to use my content. There was no reply from Pupbox and permission was never granted. My brand, Love Margot is trademarked. I am under contractual obligations with other pet brands. By Pupbox illegally using my content under Petco/Pupbox social profiles, implemented to millions of people that I represent the Pupbox brand (Petco family) when in fact, I never have. I am seeking damages of $30,000 for loss of other brand campaigns. Pupbox replied via email apologizing, they did not remove the content. The content itself was later removed by Instagrams copyright team.CertifiedSabrina GiardinanonePETCO ANIMAL SUPPLIES STORES, INC.Second Notice sent on 3/9/23
23-CCB-0002infringementA compilation of clips of a harlequin Great Dane and a premature Chihuahua puppy.Pets on Q illegally downloaded my short motion picture and used it on their social media account without my permission.On 10/21/22 Pets on Q intently stole my content from my Tiktok account to use for their personal gain on their own social media platform. They did not properly notify my account of this video being used, seemingly intentionally leaving a space between the @ and my username (@ deardanes) so that it would not notify me that this video was used. They also did not ask permission to use, nor utilize Instagram's features of tagging or collaborating on reels. I filed a copyright infringement form on November 3rd, 2022, requesting that Instagram remove the video. Pets on Q is a platform who's entire purpose is to "enable collaboration among our vetted pet influencers & set animals with brands and agencies through expert technology and services. We bring the key assets of advanced influencer search, pricing analysis, and full campaign management." Since their platform seeks to pay influencers and social media managers for the content that they create, I had reached out to Colleen Wilson on September 4, 2022, inquiring about a paid collaboration for a DNA Pet Company. Colleen replied on September 8, 2022, stating: "Your account is so great! I am a huge fan of people that foster liCertifiedNatalie BendinellinonePETS ON Q, INC.Second Notice sent on 3/9/23
23-CCB-0001infringementPHOTO OF MAN IN YELLOW SHIRT SITTING ON ANOTHERA NUMBER OF MY COPYRIGHTED PHOTOS ARE USED ON THE META PLATFORM ON THE FOOLOWING FACEBOOK PAGE. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100054769401998THE PHOTOS ARE USED FOR AGREGIOUS DEFAMATORY PURPOSES CALLING THE PERSON APPEARING IN THEM A PEDOPHILE. THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL COURT RULLINGS WHICH HAD RULLED AGAINST SUCH BASELESS CLAIMS, FOR EXAMPLE MIAMI DADE COUNTY FLORIDA CASE 2019-007732-SP-05No claim certified, no orders to amendroy millernoneMETA PLATFORMSClaim
22-CCB-0281infringementThis work is a sound recording, ProductionWithout my express written consent, the YouTuber violated my rights by uploading my sound recording. They stole a music from a portal for digital services. The song's title is "Wifin You." I am unsure of when it was ripped. I only know that it was used without my will.My rights were infringed, resulting in suffering. $5,000 is what I charge for licenses. Losing my licensing fee money as a result of someone uploading my music without my consent was unfortunate for me. $5,000 would be my requested relief.ClosedLangston M ChildsnoneChris M GarciaOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0280infringement2D artwork of a crystal cubeMy copyrighted artwork was displayed multiple times with false accusations of constant slandered of our company as in being a scammer accusing us of stealing and robbing our customers and also individual made claims that our copyrighted material belong to him. Multiple displays of our copyrighted 2D artwork were displayed on his website messenger taunting our company that he could display or copyrighted artwork as many times as he wanted to without permission as he slandered our company's name with false accusations and copying and altering our 2D artwork to defile our company's name. We have had found several fake accounts using our name and copyrighted logo pretending to be us to slander our company name using our copyrighted work to trick customers that we are potential scammers. These fake accounts were also displayed on the platforms of YouTube Instagram and Facebook.My website and company emails and phone has received hundreds of emails claiming that our company is a scam also racial slurs due to the fact that I'm a American also disturbing pornography and threatening hate text messages and phone calls about me my family and my company these acts have also cost me a few good business deal and sales. I've been through mountains of stress and anxiety because of this person hateful actions that has put my life and those around me in danger not to add I have to work even harder to defend my company's good name because his actions I strongly feel that this person should get the maximum penalty due to what he did to my company and I also wish that this person will leave my company and my family alone. We need Justice for the actions that this person committed against my company and the peace of mind that this person will leave us alone!Awaiting amendment/certificationkenneth A byrdnoneJaime F GonzalezAmended Claim
22-CCB-0279infringementStoryThey have put the video claiming it as their own work.Misinformation has spread using my video.ClosedMan, et alnoneChicagoscene88Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0278infringementMusic VideoThey took portions of my video and put it on Youtube and Patreon. I have submitted successful YouTube copyright strikes that they have taken down but they still continue to mass distribute my videos and are now appealing this on Youtube.They have monetized my content and gained income using my music video I have already copyrighted.ClosedDumitru SandrunoneChicagoscene88Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0277infringementThe work represents a video of my interview of Mr. Jhon Jairo Velasquez (aka “Popeye”) that has been filmed for the purposes of the PhD thesis.The infringing act occurred when the copy of record of the interview has been illegally obtained and modified by third parties without obtaining the permission of the author. To the best of my knowledge, the shooting team has illegally transferred the working materials to the third parties. Having the entire working copy of the video, the third parties edit my work http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEzHUU5cBo8. On YouTube and Google. I shall underline that the interview questions have been prepared by myself only. Further, the infringement occurred when illegally modified video has been published on different channels online by means of the online service provider (YouTube and Google).The provider is taking serious a counter notification which is fraud documents and fake information.Awaiting amendment/certificationCatalina Maria JaramillononeYouTube and Sebastian xibilleAmended Claim
22-CCB-0276infringementAnchorage, words and music by Michelle ShockedUnlicensed synchronization of my composition and sound recording, “Anchorage,” in a video work on YouTube, non-compliant compulsory mechanical license for a derivative work, "Anchored Down in Amsterdam," non-compliant compulsory mechanical license for audio streaming distributionI have the exclusive right to grant synchronization licenses for performances of my musical composition and sound recording, "Anchorage," with video works. I have the exclusive right to grant mechanical licenses for derivative works for my musical composition and sound recording, "Anchorage,". This unauthorized use causes serious harm to the market for licensing my works. I am seeking full statutory relief.Awaiting amendment/certificationMichelle ShockednoneTunecoreOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
22-CCB-0275infringementRecorded/uploaded LIVE video game play.Youtube user Screen recorded my live video WAYYYY past the point of fair use. Fair use utilizes small clips for commentary. This user recorded hours of my content without my permission and then edited that content into a 30 minute youtube video.He also claims hes making ANOTHER video with more of my content that hes recorded. this will be the 3rd video hes made about me/my community ft my content. i've asked him to stop and to leave my content alone. hes banned from my twitch page. nothing i do is working and he continues to make youtube content about me using my content.Members from his community have bot followed my twitch account under VERY racist and homophobic names. Bullied my community. The initial video he made was supposed to be anon. He purposefully edited the video to make sure people came to my streams. It stats in the details of the video that my identity was hidden. it was NOT. I've been harrassed in multiple ways by him and his community. I WANT TO BE LEFT ALONE. all videos of me or about me taken down.Awaiting amendment/certificationWesley MorrownoneNicholas GwizdakOrder to Amend Noncompliant Claim
22-CCB-0274infringementartwork, tarot cards deck with registrated text and photographsThis person sells my intellectual property. Complaint ID: 11584585941Actual damages are the losses suffered by the copyright owner as a result of the infringement. This includes lost sales, lost profits, lost licensing revenue, or any other demonstrable monetary loss resulting from the infringement.ClosedVHNS LLCnoneZhang JingwenOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0273infringementLive comedy performance by Ralphie MayRespondents have posted the work through multiple links to their YouTube channel, @SolarisEntertainmentMedia. Respondents are also displaying and performing the work on Spotify and Facebook. The YouTube and Spotify postings known to Claimant are currently the subject of a YouTube takedown notice and, upon information and belief, are not currently accessible by YouTube users. Respondents, upon information and belief, are also manufacturing, selling, and/or distributing physical copies of the work, and are distributing digital copies of the work online.Claimant seeks to recover all of respondents' profits and Claimant's damages, up to $30,000, or, alternatively, statutory damages of $15,000, which ever is greater. Claimant also seeks to recover her attorneys' fees and costs.CertifiedLahna TurnerIce Miller LLPMichael BloomNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
22-CCB-0272infringementPhotograph of Canon lens extender on white backgroundRespondent Ducati Studios, LLC, dba Snap Studios ("Snap") accessed the photograph at issue via Claimant's website at https://www.mrussellphotography.com/blog/canon-ef-1-4x-extender-ii-review/ and illicitly copied it from there. Snap then reproduced, posted, displayed, and distributed the photograph on its commercial website and its instagram page, to promote that it offered the lens extender for rent. Snap never requested nor was ever granted a license for these uses. After being put on notice of the infringement, Snap did not cease using the photograph. Counsel for Claimant filed DMCA Takedown Notices with AWS and Instagram, effecting the removal of the work. Respondents Ivey and Duran, as sole managing members of Snap, had control over the infringing uses of the photograph and received a financial benefit by remuneration from any rentals of the extender. Therefore, Ivey and Durant are vicariously liable for the direct infringement by Snap.Claimant requests statutory damages in the amount of $15000. Claimant further requests attorney's fees and costs as Respondents have shown bad faith in their pre-litigation communications (see attached statement of facts).ClosedMichael RussellBurns the Attorney, Inc.Ducati Studios, LLC dba Snap StudiosOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0271infringementShort Sharp Shocked, an album with words and music, performed by Michelle ShockedUnlicensed synchronization of my compositions and my sound recording, “Short Sharp Shocked,” in a video workI have the exclusive right to grant synchronization licenses for performances of my musical compositions and my sound recording, "Short Sharp Shocked," with video works. This unauthorized use causes serious harm to the market for licensing my works. I am seeking up to the full $5000 limited claimAwaiting amendment/certificationMichelle ShockednoneEric StraussAmended Claim
22-CCB-0270infringement-DMCAIT IS A SPIRITUAL WRITTEN BOOK OF ENCOURAGEMENT FOR HEALING AND PROSPERITY OF LIVINGTHEY STOLE MANUSCRIPT AND SOLD IT TO VENDORS, PRIVATE PROPERTY, FAMILY HEIRLOOM, STRCITLY WRITTEN TO BLESS IMMEDIATE BELL RESIDENCE. MY SOLE PROPERTY.I've been robbed of life insurance, health insurance, elderly and disabled insurance, college tuitions, food and clothing, rent, childcare expenses, transportation, pleasure/leisure expenses, grandparents expenses, vacation expenses, mental health/ all health expenses. THE HARM THAT I SUFFER IS THE INAPPRECIATION OF MY PERSON AND THANKSGIVING OF THE LORD WHO I WORSHIP. AND UNGRATEFUL COUNTRY THAT ROBBED ME BLIND. THAT DID NOT ADOURN ME AT ALL, MY BOOK IS WORTHY OF MY STAND AND GLORY AND RISER OF MINE. PLEASE UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE TAKE THIS PERSONAL BUT ALLOW ME TO TAKE MY POSSESSIONS THAT I BLESS THE LORD WITH AS WELL AS MY IMMEDIATE FAMILY. I HAVE BEEN ROBBED OF MY RIGHTS. MY CHARACTER, AND ALL THAT I HAVE BECOME.I AGREE THAT YOU WOULD PAY ME 70% OF ALL ROYALITIES AND RIGHTS TO THE BOOK CALLED "HE'S A FRIEND OF MINE." OF COURSE I WOULD LIKE THE BOOK TO STAY ON THE MARKET, I AM NOT TRYING TO NOT HELP OR HEAL ANYONE, UNFORTUNATELY THESE THINGS HAPPEN. SINCE THE PUBLIC HAS FOUND INSPIRIATION THROUGH MY WRITINGS WORLDWIDE, I'D LIKE TO KEEP THE BOOK ON THE MARKET. PLEASE CONSIDER IT IS A ONE TIME PAYMENT OF 70% THAT I AM ASKING FOR AND I WILL NOT COME BACK TO ASK FOR MORE, NO MATTER Awaiting amendment/certificationYVETTE BELLnoneFIRST BOOK LIBRARYCorrected Order to Amend Noncompliant Claim
22-CCB-0269infringementAn approximately 90-second audiovisual explanation of the type of work Armatus Dealer Uplift performs and why the targeted audience should choose Armatus as its agent/vendor, conveyed through a script and animation video images.Respondent Wooden has, without Claimant Armatus' permission, used a large majority of Claimant's script, and animation, in creating it's own video which it then posted/dispayed the work on the website warrantypart.com. Respondent Wooden created an unauthorized derivative work copying/reproducing much of Claimant Armatus' concept animation and reproducing much of Claimant's script verbatim. Respondent Wooden then displayed and performed the work publicly as its own. Claimant Armatus alleges that Respondent Wooden posted the unauthorized derivative work on warrantypart.com in an effort to intercept potential car dealership-clients searching for Armatus Warranty Uplift's website (www.dealeruplift.com) and using the nearly identical video to usurp Armatus' commerical business opportunities or to confuse potential clients.Lost business and profit profits due to potential confusion among prospective clients about identity of this motion picture owner and also quality of services offered by Claimant Armatus versus those allegedly offered by Respondent Wooden. Respondent Wooden was trying to sow confusion and intercept potential clients looking for Armatus Dealer Uplift online. Claimant Armatus is a leader in the dealer uplift industry and Respondent Wooden. Disgorgement of Wooden profits from its use of the infringing video. Statutory damages of $15,000. An agreement by Wooden to cease its infringing activity.CertifiedARMATUS DEALER UPLIFT, LLCLaw Office of Steven Wrobel LLCWooden Automotive Consultants LLCSecond Notice sent on 3/9/23
22-CCB-0268infringementfairy silhouettesRespondent is selling a product that contains copyrighted works.Lost sales - seeking maximum allowed and requesting removal of respondents product from sale.ClosedPinwheel Crafts LLCnoneShenzhen Jinjuhong Technology Co., Ltd.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0267infringementFantasy painting of the three graces of mythologyFine Art America is hosting the infringing content, which is posted for sale by a user of their platform who is selling prints of the subject artworks (along with many others which are not registered) without permission. Fine Art America has been contacted twice via their designated DMCA agent and has not removed the content.They are selling prints of Ms. Wall's work without permission, which we anticipate will harm authorized licensees who have the rights to sell these images as prints, including Metaverse/Fulcrum Gallery, Mixtiles, and Art.com (who are all legitimate licensees).CertifiedJosephine CoulsonnoneFine Art AmericaWaiver of Service
22-CCB-0266infringementUnicorn Pillow KitThe product this person is selling is an exact replica of our pillow case design with gold horn and ears. The images on the box and the instruction manual are exact or substantially similar to our product packaging and instructions. The listing images used contain substantially similar images to our listing.Lost sales - requesting maximum allowed and for the seller to remove all product and images.ClosedPinwheel Crafts LLCnoneChrista M HartOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0265infringementMusic, Lyrics, and Musical Arrangement; date of publication was 01/01/1993 and the date of creation is 1993; an embodiment of a public domain work within the sound recording of Holy Spirit, which is arranged by Michelle ShockedIn 1993 a charity benefit album titled “Sweet Relief” was released, which contained a recorded performance by Michelle Shocked, of a derivative version of the song “Holy Spirit” by composer Victoria Williams. Within the “Holy Spirit” sound recording was an original arrangement created by Michelle Shocked of a public domain composition titled “Come By Here.” Sony’s authority to distribute copies of the “Holy Spirit” / “Come By Here” sound recording ended in 1996. Michelle Shocked retained the sole and exclusive right to issue copies of the “Holy Spirit" / "Come By Here” recording and registered her claim of ownership with the Copyright Office Sony Music Entertainment infringed her copyrights when it manufactured and distributed a 2022 vinyl pressing of thousands of copies of the “Sweet Relief” charity album, with further distribution to online streaming platforms, which includes “Holy Spirit" / "Come By Here” without permission, and without a license from Michelle Shockeddevaluation and / or market failure for my exclusive intellectual property rights caused by infringement of my copyrights. I am seeking full statutory reliefCertifiedMichelle ShockednoneSony Music EntertainmentSecond Notice sent on 3/9/23
22-CCB-0264infringementWritten Product Description for Electronic CommerceThe infringing party had, as of 12/7/22, a listing for a similar/competing product where she had not only stolen our idea/product but had also copied almost exactly our original written product description. The listing was found here: https://www.etsy.com/listing/1210336760/teacher-appreciation-lanyard-badge-reel It is currently removed from Etsy courtesy of a DMCA takedown notice. However, the infringer filed a counter noticed and swore under penalty of perjury that she was not infringing on our rights. A cached version of the listing is available at this URL: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:SPlBSD1jPe0J:https://www.etsy.com/listing/1210336760/teacher-appreciation-lanyard-badge-reel&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari You'll need to scroll down a bit and expand the "Item Description" section in the right column. Alternatively, here is our product listing/description: https://www.etsy.com/listing/869593123/personalized-beaded-lanyard-for-keys-or We did contact the infringing party and requested that they agree to change their product description. However, we've not heard from them after repeated attempts, so we are forced to proceed witWe request that the infringer cease using our intellectual property, pay statutory damages, and reimburse all fees and costs.ClosedBy the Graces, LLCnoneJennifer VillalobosOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0263infringementAnchorage, by Michelle ShockedUnlicensed synchronization of my composition and sound recording, “Anchorage,” in a video workI have the exclusive right to grant synchronization licenses for performances of my musical composition and sound recording, "Anchorage," with video works. This unauthorized use causes serious harm to the market for licensing my works. I am seeking full statutory relief.CertifiedMichelle ShockednoneGavin McInnisDeclaration of Service - McInnis
22-CCB-0262infringementThe Most Popular 3rd-Party App Store on iOS and Android without Jailbreak or Apple IDThe Panda Helper logo and Panda Helper text are also protected under copyright law for our company. Reproducing these logos on the panda-helper.org website is a copyright infringement on its own. The designation "Panda Helper" infringes our company's registered trademark. And guide users to download their files and constantly click on advertisements, causing terrible effects. We, therefore, hope you can swiftly take down panda-helper.org in google search and provide information about its owner panda-helper.org.The Panda Helper logo and Panda Helper text are also protected under copyright law for our company. Reproducing these logos on the panda-helper.org website is a copyright infringement on its own. The designation "Panda Helper" infringes our company's registered trademark. And guide users to download their files and constantly click on advertisements, causing terrible effects. We, therefore, hope you can swiftly take down panda-helper.org in google search and provide information about its owner panda-helper.org.Awaiting amendment/certificationsoftware dynamicnoneGoogle LLCAmended Claim
22-CCB-0261infringementAfrican American Single Women's Advice book.Advertising over Amazon.com, sale of both my hardback and Kindle editions of the book, and advertising of their old produced books (self-published with myself) and then sending me a royalty check years after the termination of our contract. And the tactic has been, since 2012, to say "limited availability, book out of print" all the while selling them - I've brought copies after our contract termination, per suggestion of an attorney sometime ago. And AuthorHouse has done this before, please see the case proceeding attached - sales of author book copies after the company and she terminated self-publishing contract.I've suffered emotionally as well as reputationally as a writer. I have never had the ability to control this book, its sales, or its promotion exclusively since both of its releases. The big redux of the book was destroyed last year, as the AuthorHouse editions were still being sold and promoted via search engine online OVER my newer released edition(s). I am seeking whatever remedies are available to me, to mitigate the losses I have suffered since dealing with them since 2010.CertifiedSonja D. GracynoneAuthorHouseWaiver of Service
22-CCB-0260infringementEnhanced version of Pamela Coleman Smith's artwork on Tarot CardsThe infringing product being sold at the referenced online marketplace includes a tarot card product which incorporates the entirety of the subject registered copyrighted artwork. Additionally, the infringing tarot card product being sold at the referenced online marketplace contains an instructional booklet which was written by the author of the subject registered copyright. Finally, the packaging of the infringing product is similar in artwork and design as the subject copyright.Claimant has suffered actual damages and lost profits as a result of Defendant's wrongful conduct and therefore seeks monetary relief in the amount of $30,000.CertifiedSiren Imports, LLCCarstens, Allen & Gourley, LLPVHNS LLCOrder Granting Request to Link Nataliia Vereina with the VHNS LLC party
22-CCB-0259-noninfringementNANANACertifiedLaughing Hyena RecordsnoneMalaco RecordsWaiver of Service
22-CCB-0258infringement-DMCAlive audio visual of myself speaking on health, wellness, diversity, african health, and ethnic womenThese are the communications Ive had with Google support repeatedly and was never helped. Google Support 7/1/2021 You’re connected with agent Gabe. 9:28 AM G Thank you for reaching out to us. You're now chatting with Gabe. How are you? Gabe · 9:28 AM Fine I'm not able to access my account this is my 5th time requesting assistance Phrase deactivate my channel I'm no longer in business The business account should be closed 9:29 AM G Just to confirm, do you want to deactivate your YouTube channel? Gabe · 9:29 AM My main email is sedcredbone@gmail.com and my business email is ivysagarius@seanjaripreeti.com Yes 👍 Deactivate it 9:29 AM G Thanks for confirming. Let me check that for you. Gabe · 9:30 AM I don't have access to it 9:30 AM G May I have the channel URL, please? Gabe · 9:30 AM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iGdqDM3Eyas That's a video you just emailed me about For copywriter claim 9:30 AM G Thanks for that. I need to ask for the channel URL so that I can check your account. Gabe · 9:31 AM It's seanjaripreeti You just emailed me Hi Seanjari Preeti Womb Healing Real Yoni Pearls, After a manual review, a copyright owner has claimed some materiMy business has gone on a steady decline, my customers have had a hard time finding me since they were accustom to seeing me Every Sunday at 10AM for years. Google has avoided providing me with any income from ads that are ran from my channel. If a potential customer sees a video on youtube, the contact details are outdated so I never get that customer. The videos are still being viewed and when a customer can not find me or my website, they will find other business to patronize. My business has suffered, but I have suffered mentally from the strategic banning done by both Google and Youtube. I am asking that my content is given to me and removed from the platform. My Trademark and Logo is Also removed from the Platform. The Google Ads due to me are mailed to PO Box 65 Drayton SC 29333 and $30,000.00 for Mental Agony, Frustration, Constant denial of remedies and for antagonizing me daily. I lost customers, subscribers and business.ClosedSEANJARI PREET WOMB HEALINGnoneYOUTUBE/GOOGLEOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0257infringementLogo of womanLogo is being used without permission to promote and identify business. Facebook, Instagram and Wix have already reportedand removed content through DCMA. Physical place of business still displays signage and reports and business documents, brochures and business cards are still being distributed.My intellectual property is being used to promote and generate revenue without my permission or compensation for the use of my copyrighted logo.Awaiting amendment/certificationDavid GunthernoneArizona Breastnet, L.L.C.Order to Amend Noncompliant Claim
22-CCB-0256-DMCANANAThis has caused me to lose views and lack of interest from viewers when they went to my website to see this content making me look like a fraud when this is posted when you click on to order by download this content: "The file has been removed as it violated our Terms of Service". This has caused me mental stress and am seeking $5,000 for emotional distress and potential money loss.ClosedRonald SavagenoneTroi TorainOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0255infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant Steven Hirsch is a photojournalist based in New York City. Claimant is the creator and sole rights holder to two photographs of disgraced Columbia gynecologist, Robert Hadden, who was indicted for sexually assaulting his female patients for more than two decades. Respondent is the owner and operator of the website www.scdaily.com which is a Chinese-language editorial website. On information and belief, Respondent monetizes its website through paid advertising. On or about February 2020, Claimant discovered that two of his photographs were being displayed on Respondent's website in an editorial article. Claimant never licensed the photographs to Respondent or otherwise granted Respondent permission to use his photographs.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.CertifiedSteven HirschHigbee & AssociatesSouthern Chinese Daily News, LLCOrder for Claimant to Pay Second Filing Fee and For All Parties to Register for eCCB
22-CCB-0254infringementFour Photographs of The Residences at 66 High Street in Guilford, CTSee supplementary materialSee supplementary materialCertifiedDennis CarboHigbee & AssociatesLuchs Consulting Engineers, LLCNotice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
22-CCB-0253infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant is a professional photographer. Claimant is the owner and sole rights holder to a real estate photograph. On or about April 2022, Claimant discovered his real estate photograph being displayed on multiple pages of Respondent's website with his permission. Between April 2022 and early June 2022, Claimant's attorneys corresponded with Respondent's legal representation regarding the infringement. However, as of June 4, 2022, Claimant's real estate photograph had still not been removed from Respondent's website. The parties were unable to reach a resolution and ceased communication on or about June 10, 2022, after which the photograph was apparently removed from the website.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is largerCertifiedJohn NaschinskiHigbee & AssociatesCirca Group, LLCOrder for Claimant to Pay Second Filing Fee and For All Parties to Register for eCCB
22-CCB-0252infringementThe work represents a video of my interview of Mr. Jhon Jairo Velasquez (aka “Popeye”) that has been filmed for the purposes of the PhD thesis.The infringing act occurred when the copy of record of the interview has been illegally obtained and modified by third parties without obtaining the permission of the author. To the best of my knowledge, the shooting team has illegally transferred the working materials to the third parties. Having the entire working copy of the video, the third parties replaced my image and voice with another person asking the same questions as in the original record. I shall underline that the interview questions have been prepared by myself only. Further, the infringement occurred when illegally modified video has been published on different channels online by means of the online service provider (YouTube and Google). In addition, I attract your attention to the fact that the infringement of YouTube is confirmed by the partial removal of infringing materials leaving the part of it publicly available. (Confirmation is attached)Due to the illegal actions of the third parties that has altered and used the video materials indented to be used in the PhD work I had lost the opportunity to use these materials in my work and lost the funds that I have invested into having this interview recorded (including but not limited to travel expenses, production costs, etc.) as well as the loss of my time and efforts is unmeasurable. Moreover, due to my efforts to fight against this infringement, my personal data has been published by the infringing channel calling for public disgrace. I have received personal threats from the infringers using and making publicly available my work. As a relief sought I demand immediate stoppage of public availability of the materials fraudulently obtained and modified.Awaiting amendment/certificationCatalina M JaramillononeYouTubeAmended Claim
22-CCB-0251infringementfairy silhouettesRespondent created an identical product to our own using copyright artwork. We reached out to them in early 2021, then again throughout the year and through an attorney earlier this year. Respondent continues to sell the infringing product online on amazon.com as well as their own website.Lost sales - we are seeking the maximum allowed under small claims.CertifiedPinwheel Crafts LLCnoneMary L. PetitPettit Proof of Service
22-CCB-0250infringementThis sound recording-music, lyrics, and arrangement.Mr. Steven Elling has fraudulently registered copyrights on my previously copyrighted songs that were and continue to be registered in your database. He does not have any ownership or other rights to these songs. These are multiple offenses. Mr. Elling initiated copyright takedown claims on a variety of streaming platforms and music distribution platforms including but not limited to, Spotify, Itunes/Apple music ,Amazon Music, Pandora, You tube, and CD baby, to the detriment of my copyrighted music's promotion, marketing, Playlist inclusion, and direct streaming revenue, and Cd sales. Mr. Elling Posted has posted my songs fraudulently as his own on various online services. including but not necessarily limited to, Soundcloud website and music distribution service , and TAXI .com The Worlds leading A&R company, and quite possibly on other sites A fourth copyright infringement by Mr. Elling involves false copyright claims of ownership of my songs during the course of my live interview that involved The playing and promotion of my copyrighted music which resulted in the prohibition of the playing of my music, only subsequently rectified through my engagement of legal coI have suffered lost streaming revenue, CD sales, and royalty interruption of my music from false copyright takedown claims by Mr. Elling with Spotify, Amazon Music, Apple Music/iTtunes, YouTube, and many other global distribution music platforms. Fraudulent copyrights filed on my music by Mr. Elling has also resulted in lost promotion and marketing opportunities for my music, including radio promotion events being interrupted by false copyright claims made by Mr. Elling. As a result of Mr. Elling's copyright infringements, the expenditure of significant time and money has been required of me. 1. I would like the fraudulent copyrights that Steven Elling registered of my works removed from the copyright catalog 2. I would like reimbursement for revenues lost for streaming and CD sales due to Mr. Elling's fraudulent copyright take down claims. 3. I would like reimbursement for expenses incurred to counter Mr. Elling's infringements. These expenses include $13,800 for studio recording and work-for-hire producer and musicians to avoid further copyright infringement from Mr. Elling. Other expenses include legal fees of $6,000-plus, to date. Expenses totaling $800-plus,CertifiedMary Ann PalermononeSteven w EllingPROOF OF SERVICE
22-CCB-0249infringement-DMCAPublicationThe claim is regarding the publication "Monocyte distribution width (MDW) performance as an earlysepsis indicator in the emergency department: comparison with CRP and procalcitonin in a multicenterinternational European prospective study". Hausfater, P., Robert Boter, N., Morales Indiano, C. et al. Monocyte distribution width (MDW) performance as an early sepsis indicator in the emergency department: comparison with CRP and procalcitonin in a multicenter international European prospective study. Crit Care 25, 227 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-021-03622-5 I am filling this complaint for the reasons below: 1) The company removed my name from the manuscript as retaliation because I left the company 2) The authors have taken my work and claimed this is their work 3) They used my name in the acknowledgment section without my consent or giving me any chance to verify the contents of the manuscript 4) The manuscript contains some parts that are not true For the details, please see the attached files. There are four parties involved with the violation 1) Beckman Coulter, Inc, a US-based company and its representative Liliana Tejidor, 2) Pierre Hausfater, tIt is beyond imagination how stressful this is! I am a young researcher. Every work of mine is hard-earned, and it is very disappointing to see that these veteran researchers stole my work and claimed that this is their work. I tried to solve this in many ways. They either ignored me or pretended that it was very normal to steal someone’s work. It is their mercy whether I will get anything out of my hard work. I contacted the corresponding authors and the Beckman representative, Liliana Tejidor. Liliana Tejidor is not a corresponding author, but she is responsible for all decisions for this kind of project as a company representative. The corresponding author is nothing but a hired researcher only. I have been trying to resolve the issue since June 30, 2021. I reached out to the author, but they did not want to solve the issue. Then I reached out to the journal. The Journal asked them to solve the issue but showed them how to just include my name nominally without giving me proper credit for my work. According to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Journal guidelines, the journal must demonstrate neutrality which it failed to show. The editor appeared to have ClosedMohamad S HasannoneLiliana M TejidorOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0248infringementWeb ArticleThe work titled "Are there Wolves in CT? [2022 Update]", found here https://connecticutentertainer.com/are-there-wolves-in-ct/, is a reworking of my original content. I researched and wrote the content on the original work here: https://connecticutexplorer.com/are-there-wolves-in-ct/Website traffic and income were lost.CertifiedSuzanne BucknamnoneRyan OuelletteService Packet
22-CCB-0247infringement-DMCAGlass ball filled with specific subject matter herbs based on metaphysical properties with a clay sculpted fairy insideCopying work derivative as well as full harassment online creating waves of attacks to my website and emails because party publicly online harassed and created a mob mentality against me causing lack of sales and constant attacks.Copying work derivative as well as full harassment online creating waves of attacks to my website and emails because party publicly online harassed and created a mob mentality against me causing lack of sales and constant attacks. This has caused severe diminished sales, anxiety and time wasted attempting to stop and block “followers” she has sent to crash my product and sales causing anxiety and stress with emotional insult.ClosedMichelle A MilanononeEliza DavisOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0246infringementMedical DeviceWebsites sell counterfeit products of my patented medical devices. These devices should be sold only in medical institutions after consultation with a doctor. In the description, misleading people about treatment and endangering patients' health. We have a German court order to suspend this website (pectushealing.com) in Germany and the European Union.Reimbursement in the amount of $50,000ClosedEckart KlobenonePectushealingFinding of Bad Faith and Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0245infringementExplainer videoSay It Visually, Inc. d/b/a Fast Forward Stories (“FFS”) is the creator and owner of the copyrights in various “explainer” videos that it produces and licenses to its clients. Clients pay initial setup fees plus monthly subscription fees for access to various FFS videos, which FFS typically hosts for its subscribers on a commercial video-hosting platform. FFS protects its videos by providing video hosting, whereby visitors to a subscriber’s website have access only to a stream of the video, rather than a copy. Hosting is configured so that video source download is unavailable. FFS has recently discovered that the respondent has illegally made and posted copies of FFS property online, including at least the following: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuM6_JEmwuY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko2HFBvCa9s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHJVgkdsFAI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXdoFKAxeAA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY6lI4-UvFs The creation, distribution and ongoing public availability of these videos violate our copyrights. Respondent has no right to make copies, ignoring the clear copyright statement visible on each video. Respondent has no license to distribute Fast Forward Stories' business has been harmed by respondent's infringement in lost revenue, reduced market and substantially increased risk of additional infringement(s). Respondent could have availed themselves of the content by licensing directly from FFS — in fact, the CMI information on each video indicate clearly the Internet location where licensing could have been arranged. By electing to evade protections, copy, upload, display and make the work available for public performance, respondent deprived FFS of the modest fees respondent would have paid to license the content legally. For the span of time these illegal copies have been publicly available, FFS licensing and hosting fees for respondent would have ranged from $6,534 to $26,344, depending on the set of videos selected. The public display and ease of free public performance enabled by respondent's illegal posting of the videos on the dominant public video service (YouTube) also harmed FFS by reducing the market for commercial licensing. Potential licensees have turned down licensing and payment because "they could get the same thing on YouTube", depriving FFS of the opportunity to recoup its substantial inveAwaiting amendment/certificationSay It Visually, IncnoneAmerica's Real Estate BrokersAmended Claim
22-CCB-0244-noninfringementNANANACertifiedGrand United Order of Oddfellows in American and JurisdictionGavin Law Offices, PLCShawn O CannonRequest to Link Ashley Villagracia with the Shawn O Cannon party
22-CCB-0243infringementphotographs, text, instruction manual of Paracord Bracelet KitThe infringer is selling an exact replica of our Paracord Bracelet Kit product and duplicated our instruction manual. They are using 28 registered photos as well as the actual coprighted text our our manual.We have suffered lost sales due to an exact replica of our product being produced and sold on the same platforms we are selling on. We are requesting maximum relief allowable.CertifiedPinwheel Crafts LLCnoneDavid FolletFollet Proof of Service.pdf
22-CCB-0242infringementPhotograph of JacketOn or about April 1, 2022, Claimant photographed items from Respondent's 2022 collection. Respondent did not pay the invoice for the services or license fee and proceeded to widely reproduce, publish, and distribute copies of Claimant's works in its 2022 print Summer Brochure and on its website ninamclemore.com. On or about August 23, 2022 Claimant sent a formal demand to Respondent regarding the unauthorized use, however no payment was made and the works continued to be published online. On November 11, 2022 Claimant sent a final cease and desist notice to Respondent, which was also ignored.$30,000 Claimant seeks an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed .CertifiedCade Martin Photography, Inc.Emilie Esther Pitts, PANina McLemore, Inc.Proof of Waiver
22-CCB-0241infringementSound recording of music compositions and arrangementsRespondent performed the copyrighted musical work, synchronized to composite video of scenes from the motion picture A Clockwork Orange, as background music to respondent's audio commentary, which was not related in any way to the music being performed.Loss of usual fees for licenses required for synchronization of the music composition/arrangement and master recording use for performance of the music in connection with the video displayed and performed on YouTube.com. Dilution of value of music. Usual licensing fees would be $15,000 per copyright or $30,000 total. However, Claimant would forego claim for damages if Respondent would agree to withdraw inappropriate DMCA Counter Notice filed with respect to this video with YouTube.com.ClosedSerendip LLCnoneQadr CalliensOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0240-DMCANANAThey uploaded my videos from views they make money also they copyright my 2 songs which I bought from the singer. and I have prove that I paid singer for those 2 songs for my movies.ClosedAli OrokzainoneAfghan SmartOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0239infringementAn Ann Coulter speaking event at Cornell University that was disrupted by protestors. I was in attendance. I shot and edited the video.Following my attendance at the Ann Coulter speaking event on Cornell campus, I uploaded the video I shot and edited onto my YouTube channel 'Ithaca Crime' (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCt8Glm0_VaY7JfZe7EDQa4Q) at this URL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LvqZDJHrTA in the early morning of 10/10/22. Later on in the day on 11/10/22, I discovered Lucente had copied the entirety of my video and reuploaded it onto his on YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzA9ae7N3s0.Traffic and views that would have drawn attention to my website and my work was diverted to Lucente's YouTube channel. I request that Lucente delete my content from his YouTube channel and cease any further use of my copyrighted works without my express written permission.ClosedZachary WinnnoneRocco LucenteOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0238infringementPhotography timelapse video featuring 71 individual timelapse sequences highlighting the City of Chicago at night.They used my video as their main hero banner on their website home page with their company slogan placed on top of it. They also cropped out my watermark used on the video in the lower right corner. They did this through embedding the video. My original video can be seen here: https://vimeo.com/225245092The App Shack, Inc. and it's agents improperly used my video for over 4 years on their website. You can see a detail of events of this incident at this web page here: https://www.maxwilsonphotography.com/copyright-violation-by-the-app-shack-wheaton-illinois/ Using my work in such a manner devalues it and makes it not as desirable to other potential local clients who may wish to license it properly for it's use. I originally sent them a very reasonable $4500.00 invoice for it's use, which equates to $100.00 a month. This is far below the regular retail license price of my video as seen on my licensing agency Nimia. Just one sequence of my video would license for $1000.00 a year for this type of use. They used the entire video containing 71 unique timelapse sequences. I was notified through email there would be no funds to pay me and that all the parties involved now work and run VistaSuite, another Wheaton, IL based tech company. They did make their website private a few days after I notified them of the unlawful use. Initial communications with them have met with negative results to pay my invoice. I am seeking $4500.00 from the respondents for the 4 year use of my video.ClosedMax WilsonnoneThe App Shack, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0237infringementYouTube video documentaryvideos were copied from my YouTube channel and shown on another channel ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMXCqQ-PGwUInJiIPnB9CPQ/ ) without permission. in the video the person is herd ( DAVID NEFF ) talking down about me as the creator and mocking to make fun off my content and encourage others to stop following my channel. both of my entire videos are used in the video. there are also multiple other people taking part in the slander and defamation of character. I would like a cease and desist order and if it is found that my content is used on this channel or any other channel with any legal or personal ties to the channel and its creators in question, i would like greater legal charges met. The Videos are currently removed due to filing copyright strike with YouTube, but David Neff is filing counter notification to claim his right to use my work freely with YouTube which he has no right. YouTube has given me 10 days to take action to keep videos removed.I would like guarantee that David Neff and his partner creators can never use my content on this original channel or any new channels he creates out of spite or he will face criminal and legal charges. If possible an recorded apology on his main YouTube channel.CertifiedMarcellus SabranoneDavid NeffOrder to Show Cause
22-CCB-0236infringementA series of workshop slides presented as part of my Say No Club group coaching programRespondent's virtual workshop, Identifying and Fulfilling Your Needs for the Recovering People-Pleaser, included unauthorized use of my copyrighted works, including: Empowered Boundaries for the Recovering People-Pleaser; Braver Boundaries: Building Courage and Resiliency; and The Say No Club, Weeks 1, 2, and 4. This workshop was published on Eventbrite.com, hosted on Zoom, and included approximately 15 attendees. The respondent attended my workshops and courses from which the infringing material was sourced, and I have receipts to confirm this. Respondent refused to sign a cease and desist letter affirming that she would not cease and desist any and all further unlawful acts of copyright infringement, including reproduction, distribution, or performance of the copyrighted materials.The respondent made approximately $700 in profit from repurposing my copyrighted works. (The workshop charged $50 per attendee and there were approximately 15 attendees). I am seeking 1) $700 in damages and 2) written confirmation, in the form of a signature upon my original cease and desist letter, that the respondent will not participate in any further unlawful acts of copyright infringement of these materials.ClosedHailey P MageenoneKlara KernigOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0235infringementHow to use LittleMum Back MassagerThe respondent has been selling their products via Amazon in the USA since July 2022. Without our permission, the respondent uses our group of images in their user guide, and sends them to their customers.The respondent has been selling their products via Amazon in the USA since July 2022. Without our permission, the respondent uses our group of images in their user guide, and sends them to their customers. The respondent is misleading Amazon users into thinking that their products are made by Littlemum Care. This misleading and deceptive conduct is destroying the reputation and brand name of Littlemum Care as the respondent's products are made by low quality material. We request the following: 1. the respondent immediately stops selling their products with their user guide that contains our images; 2. The respondent ensure that the above misleading conduct will not occur in the future; and 3. The respondent pays $30,000.00 as damages incurred from our loss of potential profit and damage done to our business reputation.ClosedRaimy Financial Solutions Pty Ltd Trading as LittleMum CarenoneValiance Media Llc22-CCB-0235 Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0234infringement-DMCAOutlining the history and culture of IrelandThis is an automated blog which is stealing my literary work and posting it on their website.This activity of stealing my website's content is hurting my search engine ranking potential. We would like to have the infringing content removed and the domain blocked from appearing on search engines like Google, Bing, etc.ClosedIrelands, LLC.noneOA Publishing LondonFinding of Bad Faith and Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0233infringementVideo PodcastThe video was altered and reuploaded to the respondent's channel without our permission. Furthermore, the alterations were made to misrepresent and defame the authors. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z43iqz4INtKqFNaB3Q7JUapNAd0wEYal/view?usp=sharingThe video was uploaded immediately after the original video which created marketplace confusion and hurt the original video's message.ClosedStarrcast LLCnoneKevin ScampoliOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0232-DMCA-noninfringementNANAEmotional, Psychological.ClosedDavid L HarpernoneAmazonOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0231infringementcomicDistribution of my work and removal of my logo from picturesThe barrier to being able to be the sole owner of my work.ClosedVadim ShmatkononeMark ThorneerOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0230infringementVideogame commentaryJason Howard has been reuploading clips of my content on his channel without my permission. His video is a compilation of my content.The reuploads directly compete with the marketability of the original as it is a compilation of my videos.ClosedJohn W BaiknoneJason HowardOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0229infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 244: Jorge Masvidal vs. Nate Diaz mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on November 2, 2019 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Bushwhackers Bar & Grill LLC, Rhonda Arney and Scott Pearson (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Bushwhackers Bar & Grill located at 111 S. Main Street, Canton, SD 57013 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondents Rhonda Arney and Scott Pearson are individuals who resClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisBushwhackers Bar & Grill LLCSecond Notice sent on 3/15/23 to Scott Pearson
22-CCB-0228infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 244: Jorge Masvidal vs. Nate Diaz mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on November 2, 2019 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Aspect LLC and Nasser Hammami (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Bar Nine located at 1405 Prairie Parkway, West Fargo, ND 58078 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondent Nasser Hammami is an individual who resides in the State of North Dakota and was a member, managClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisAspect LLCPayment of Second Filing Fee
22-CCB-0227infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 244: Jorge Masvidal vs. Nate Diaz mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on November 2, 2019 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Sunil G. Mahabir and Jillian Mahabir (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Sunny’s Pizza & Jillian’s Pub located at 6 King Square, Whitefield, NH 03598 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondents Sunil G. Mahabir and Jillian Mahabir are individuals who resides in the StClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.ClosedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisJillian MahabirOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0226infringementNone givenSportsTrust used/displayed Claimant Spinelli's image of NFL player, Geno Atkins, on its commercial website to promote/market its sports agency business.Statutory damagesCertifiedPaul SpinelliMcCulloch Kleinman LawSportsTrust Advisors, LLCAffidavit of Service
22-CCB-0225infringement-DMCAMusical Short FilmThe infringement occured when the work was publicly posted without written or verbal permission and also original author was not cited along with misrepresenting original author of the work.Financial losses and also missed opportunity on worldwide platforms to be publically acknowledged for my workClosedrenee moncadanoneAubrey WilliamsOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0224infringementNone givenSportsTrust copied and displayed Claimant's images of NFL players on its commercial website for purposes of promoting/marketing its sports agency business.Statutory damagesCertifiedScott BoehmMcCulloch Kleinman LawSportsTrust Advisors, LLCAffidavit of Service
22-CCB-0223infringementExterior Drone Photographs of Edgewater Lodge in Elgin, ILRonald Ewing of Re/Max Horizon Elgin knowingly infringed on my copyrights by stealing my local photos of the Edgewater Creekside Lodge in Elgin, IL from another listing agents published photos and posting them in his own listing. These photos contain my watermark.I charge for my time and images to be used on listings. I sent multiple emails including invoices and a contract to invite his continued usage for this listing to Mr. Ewing. He ignored my messages and simply removed the infringing photos from MOST of the sites but not all. Due to the time spent trying to retrieve damages for his misuse and added to the bill of $500 I sent to settle the matter, I am asking for $2500 now for filing paperwork and attempts to collect damages so far.ClosedBobbi Rose PhotographynoneRonald EwingOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0222infringementA retelling of Oz, where things are more grown up and music, magick, and color are under siege and their world collides with ours in a case of sabatoge by a Death WitchCopying, claiming ownership, distribution, alteration, etc. Even now after the work is for sale on both Amazon and Apple Books the passwords are being used to change the content and cover art, even changing the targeted age range down to young kids, as retaliation of me calling Social Services on all three’s negligence of the three small kids/grandkids last year.Harassment, distraction, changes to potential sales and missed deadlines. Income potential, and ad and promotional delays, resulting in economic impact.ClosedMichael L McBridenoneLeann M ThompsonOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0221infringementPortrait of Chef in restaurantThe image is used on a public facing commercial website without authorization or valid license.The claimants primary source of income is through the licensing of photographic imagery. This infringer used the claimants copyrighted imagery without permission, payment, or license, depriving the claimant of their primary source of income from works created for such purpose.ClosedDana HurseynoneTHE LITTLE DOOR CORPOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0220infringementThe sound recording and underlying composition "The Sting of Loss" by Kerry Muzzey- Smuin Ballet used my work “The Sting of Loss” in their choreographed and performed dance work “Loss” for 5 filmed and streamed performances in February 11-15, 2021. No synchronization rights were obtained for the synchronization of the music to the film which was used for the live-streaming of the performance on each of the 5 occasions. Smuin did not obtain grand rights licenses for the dramatization of this work, and they did not obtain master recording licenses for the use of the sound recording. Additionally, they did not obtain public performance rights for the performances or the web streaming uses of the filmed work. - Grand rights are required here as the dance work "Loss" used my music "The Sting of Loss" to convey a dramatic narrative. Per Smuin Ballet's own description: " ... we revisit "LOSS", Cassidy Isaacson'y emotional solo created for Lauren Pschirrer earlier this year, which she described as a way to express grief when you don't know how to do it in words.... For Lauren, the creative process meant revisiting the experience of loss and feeling those emotions all over again. She recalled that it was uncomfortable at first, but using that emotion and putting it int1) I did not receive license fees for these commercial uses of my work. 2) Smuin Ballet used my work to generate income for itself: admission fees, donations, and direct sponsorships from patrons. 3) for a composer, being able to tout and publicize the use of his work by a ballet company is a feather in his cap: it's validation of one's work. Smuin deprived me of the ability to publicize my involvement with this work and with their company, which is a known dance company in the world of contemporary ballet. The normal penalty for unlicensed music use in the world of music publishing and master recordings is a 3x-10x fee penalty per infringing use. I initially proposed a 3x penalty of my normal fees for live performance/grand rights use and *no penalty multiplier* for the year-long use of the filmed performance on Smuin's website and social media sites. That total fee was $7000. Smuin rejected it saying they normally paid between $50 - $1500 for music use - which only confirmed my suspicion that Smuin is well aware of its legal obligation to license its music, and in this case, chose not to. This is a willful infringement. I now seek the following fees inclusive of penaltiClosedKirbyko Music LLCnoneSmuin BalletOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0219infringementColor photograph of a couple walking down a path in a parkThe image is used on a commercial website without authorization or valid license.The claimants primary source of income is through the licensing of photographic imagery. This infringer used the claimants copyrighted imagery without permission, payment, or license, depriving the claimant of their primary source of income from works created for such purpose.CertifiedDana HurseynoneHakimian Global LLCFirst Default Notice
22-CCB-0218infringementPhotographThe Trump Organization copied and posted Mr. Vanasco's copyrighted photographs to its commercial website without proper license or permission from Mr. Vanasco.Mr. Vanasco is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Vanasco charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. The Trump Organization failed to properly license Mr. Vanasco's copyrighted photograph. Mr. Vanasco is due the cost of a proper license for the images at issue, as well as attributable profits by The Trump Organization.ClosedStephen C. VanascoThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.The Trump OrganizationOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0217infringementPhotographMs. Stanfield is a commercial photographer and writer, who operates the website, www.thetasteedit.com, which contains articles on places around the world where Ms. Stanfield has visited and eaten. Mr. Trent copied Ms. Stanfield's copyrighted photograph originally posted to www.thetasteedit.com, and posted it to his commercial website, www.trentluxury.com, in order to advertise the real property located at 14031 Aubrey Road, Beverly Hills, CA 90210.Ms. Stanfield is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of her copyrighted photographs. Ms. Stanfield charges license fees for the proper use of her copyrighted photographs. Mr. Trent failed to properly license Ms. Stanfield's copyrighted photograph. Ms. Stanfield is due the cost of a proper license for the image at issue, as well as attributable profits by Mr. Trent.ClosedSarah StanfieldThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Morgan TrentOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0216infringementVoiceover and videoJoshua Peterson aka LouiKey is pirating material from DJMeechyMeech LLC and reuploading to his youtube channel for financial gain. Joshua Peterson has been informed many times to stop reuploading my work to youtube. But user refuses.User is stealing viewership from my channel. Users dont need to watch content on my channel if the user is just going to steal my work and reupload it to his channel. This is costing me thousands of dollars per month. Joshua Peterson needs to pay DJMeechyMeech LLC $1000 usd dollars per video. User currently has 3 videos on his channel with my work.Closeddjmeechymeech LLCnoneJoshua PetersonOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0215infringementPhoto of Butterfly BootsWillful and repeated infringement of Claimant's copyrighted materials. The Claimant sent multiple notices to the Respondent and/or Respondent web host (i.e., Shopify) in an effort to amicably resolve the issue and stop the infringing activities. However, the Respondent has repetitively disregarded the notices and continues to infringe Claimant's rights. The first notice was sent to Respondent's web host on December 202; a second notice was sent to Respondent on January 2022; a third notice was sent to the Respondent's web host on May 2022).Lost sales and profitsCertifiedDolls Kill, Inc.noneBMEssentialsWaiver of Service
22-CCB-0214infringementWood Display with shelves and pegs to hold ringsI own an etsy shop. The item that is being infringed upon is my own work that I sell on etsy. The respondent copied my photos and description and added it to her own etsy shop to sell as her own handmade item. Once she got a sale for the item in her shop she would buy it from my shop using a suspected stolen credit card. And then have me ship it directly to their buyer. I do not sell this item for resale.They are selling the item in their shop and I can tell when I get an order that look suspicious - so I do not fulfill that order. I do not want to help this person in any way create fraud. Or to steal from someone else. They are misrepresenting me and my business. They have stolen my photos and my words and it makes me look bad when she can not supply the product that was ordered from her shop.ClosedMegan JelkennoneJade OverendOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0213infringement-DMCA-noninfringementALL MUSICAL ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT ATMOSPHERE CREATIONINGALL DIGITAL ART & N CREATIONS FAIR CLAIM ROYALTIES FAMILIES MACHINMY MUSIC / ALL DIGITAL ARTS FROM LICENSEES COLLECTION DIGITAL ARTS AND VALUES THE INFRINGMENT PAY MECHANICAL ROYALTIES AND ALL OTHERS DUE TO NATURE PROCEEDINGS of machinery / ALL ACTS + 609 FAIR CREDIT ACTClosedRATIAGE J SMITHnoneRATIAGE / THREE ARTS & ALL ENTERTAINMENTOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0212infringementfairy silhouettesThe respondent created an exact replica of our product, including (and using) the same fairy silhouettes. The respondent has been aware of this as far back as January 2021 (possibly earlier), as we have contacted them previously regarding a design patent infringement.The exact loss is unknown, and best guess would be $250,000-$500,000 of lost revenue. We are seeking the maximum relief allowed by the Copyright Small Claims Board of $30,000.ClosedPinwheel Crafts LLCnoneTsoi Cheung ChingOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0211Not availableNANANot availableClosedSee captionNot availableSee captionOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0210infringementvocalsvideoLoss of potential income and for relief that my work will not be infringed anymoreClosedshawn BrownnoneFlorian E SimoesOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0209infringementSculptureThis person has copied my sculpture in picture form and published it online via Facebook, Instagram, his band's Website, etc. And in physical form in a published book of his "original" drawings and also printed on tour t-shirts, his album cover and other merchandise he sells for his band.As a visual artist the is a despicable act, as a musical artist, on his end to blantantly copy my original sculpture that was highly publicized internationally via various art press sources and to refer to it as his "original" drawing. I have no way to explain the hurt and disgust this, as an artist, makes me feel.ClosedAnastasia PeliasnoneAnthony L NeighborsOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0208infringementHalloween digital artClaimants design is being resold as original artwork with no changes made to the original design. The design being stolen is an exact copy.Claimant has had to use up their time, money, and resources to argue this case. This act puts the original artist’s reputation at risk.ClosedKatie A AlticenoneChris BartonOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0207infringementYouTube video“Oddheader” is a gaming YouTube channel created by Randall Rigdon Jr. (“Randall”) in 2018, who produces the videos with Cassandra Lipp (“Cassandra”) and a third collaborator who goes by the pseudonym of “Slippy Slides” online. The Oddheader channel, as of this writing, has 770,000 subscribers and has been featured in a number of online entertainment press outlets such as Kotaku and NME for being the first to document and solve exclusive mysteries and discoveries in video games. The type of content in each of the original works produced by the Oddheader team involves hundreds of hours of labor spent doing numerous things such as talking to developers for the first time to get exclusive information about mysteries in games, modifying video game code to uncover never-before-seen details, and creatively composing and narrating scripted original works for publication. Every original work features new content from the subject video game that has never been published before Oddheader’s publication of the work, usually as a product of extensive research, composition, scripting, and edited material. On September 21, 2022, Slippy Slides informed Randall and Cassandra in a private DiscAppleby’s video “20 CREEPIEST Secrets in Kid Games,” uploaded on his T5G YouTube channel was a clear copying of the popular YouTube video series “Shocking Easter Eggs In Kids Games” from the YouTube channel Oddheader and used original work from 8 different videos produced for and by the Oddheader channel. At no time was Appleby/T5G given any authorization, license, or permission from Oddheader for use of any Oddheader content which comprised the majority of T5G’s video without any attribution to the infringed work. Doing so caused numerous damages to Oddheader and to the Oddheader brand. Appleby’s unauthorized use of the materials produced by the Oddheader channel was designed to intentionally misled his audience into thinking the original material was his own and to confuse the marketplace. It was an attempt to move traffic away from the Oddheader channel and to his own channel, T5G, using unauthorized, original, creative material originally produced by and for the Oddheader channel. Appleby’s unauthorized use passes off hundreds of hours of labor and creative research from the Oddheader channel as his own for commercial monetary gains. Appleby’s video garnered a million ClosedRandall W Rigdon, JrnoneThomas ApplebyOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0206infringementA Personal Photo Of MyselfThis person is utilizing a picture that was stolen from my employer's website without my expressed written consent. He also refuses to ask for permission like a normal human being and has stated his plans to continue infringing on my registered copyrightI haven't suffered any harm. The relief I am seeking is for the respondent to cease using my registered, copywritten material on his YouTube channel and any other social media accounts without my permissionCertifiedAnthony OkafornoneGerald PalmerOrder Denying Request to Link Anthony Okafor with the Anthony Okafor party
22-CCB-0205infringementSound Recording, Production, Musical Performance,Musical Arrangement"I'll Be There Tonight" was released without a recording contract with Laurie Records (Respondent Julie Ann Schwartz) for Recording Artist Leslie Fradkin PKA "The Global Gonks". The subject SR (Sound Recording-Legal Owner: Leslie M Fradkin) was stolen from the Demo Recording of the Legal and Beneficial Owner (Leslie Fradkin, now dba RRO Entertainment), and the Composition "I'll Be There Tonight" was stolen from Legal and Beneficial Owner and claimant Leslie M Fradkin. Copyright on Composition subsequently sold to Respondent Spirit Music Group. SR subsequently sold to Respondents EMI/Capitol, then UMG, and Shami Music Group. respectively. mInfringement is still ongoing Online.SR and Composition contains a valuable commercial performance from original members of the Baroque Pop group The Left Banke. Song and recording was originally created as a demo in 1972 and the Sound recording was completed and released Worldwide by RRO Entertainment (Leslie Fradkin, Owner and Member) on June 6, 2022. Stolen demo recording, never intended for public broadcast or display or distribution, unfairly competes with RRO Official Release. Relief requested-return of stolen SR, Composition and damages awarded to Claimant of $30,000.Awaiting amendment/certificationLeslie M FradkinnoneEMI / Capitol RecordsAmended Claim
22-CCB-0204infringementMy copyright work has titled: 5 Healthiest Fruit Choices for Diabetes (or translated in Chinese: 5種糖尿病最健康的水果選擇). My copyright work is primarily contains the original script created by myself in full Chinese text format. The script introduced five types of healthiest fruit choices that diabetes people can choose for. The script was created by myself with the purpose of incorporating it into my YouTube video, together with my own recorded voice of reading the copyright script as the narration in the video. The copyright work or the script was eventually compiled into narration in my final video and the video was first published on my YouTube channel on December 31, 2021 with the Chinese title name 糖尿病健康水果:5種糖尿病最健康的水果選擇. My copyright work registration was submitted to the US Copyright Office on Oct 11, 2022 and currently pending for application with a reference number 111813825221.The infringement activity was occurred when the Respondent and the Infringer, who I neither know or meet him at anywhere nor any relationship with him, uploaded an infringing video to URL at issue: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu5g7gxDC64 on August 18, 2022 with a video title name in Chinese wordings “水果是糖尿病人的禁忌?大錯特錯!醫生提醒這5種可以放心吃,血糖絕對不會升高!趕緊轉發告訴家裏人 |三味書屋”. The infringement activity committed by the Respondent and the Infringer was occurred without my awareness, permission and consent at the beginning. I was only able to discover the infringement activity in the early of October 2022 when I watched the video at issue online. What I had discovered from the infringing video at issue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu5g7gxDC64 was that the Respondent and the Infringer substantially plagiarize my copyright work with exact character-by-character and sequence-by-squence, and replicated them into the infringing video’s playback timestamp between 1:58 minutes until 11:29 minutes without seeking my permission and consent by any means. As the author and the Claimant of the copyright work, I had responded to the infringement activity by submitting a copyright claim request to the online conteThe Respondent’s wrongful activity has caused suffers to the Claimant in term of: 1) My channel brand name is being tainted when the Respondent unilaterally stressed that the infringing video uploaded by him would benefit my channel from his wrongful activity in term of subscriber, view, market exposure share and profit, as per mentioned in his counter notification statement, 2) My personal credibility is being tainted when the Respondent claimed that I mistakenly reported him for the infringement, while in fact, the Respondent admitted his own wrongful activity in his counter notification to YouTube, 3) Loss of work productivity due to time and energy consumed in tackling the infringement, 4) Body harm due to a week long of sleep-less nights to deal with the infringement, 5) Mind and brain stress caused by the infringement disturbance, 6) Loss of appetite and minor gastrointestinal problem caused by the infringement disturbance. For all these reasons and harms suffered to me, as the author and the Claimant, I decided to file this infringement claim to the US Copyright Claim Board to seek for: 1) Restrain the allegedly infringement from being reinstated on YouTube, 2) RClosedKam Yoong Wongnone宇杰 刘Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0203-DMCANANAFor years, I have actively enforced my copyrights against unauthorized use. Most infringers are typically located overseas, trying to sell blurry, pixelated/distorted prints that they offer for sale by lazily uploading my images to quick, print-on-demand service websites. I've issued DMCA takedown notices, and after these infringers make a quick buck, they usually delete their accounts and disappear. However, lately there has been a disturbing trend of brazen infringers filing false counter-notices because there is no consequence to them. The burden of proof is on artists like me who the infringers count on not being able to afford the cost, time and emotional turmoil to file a Federal lawsuit against them. I take great pride in my 5-star reviews, providing personal customer service and high quality products to my loyal patrons. Aside from lost revenue, by reproducing and profiting off of poor quality reproductions of my copyrighted artwork, the Respondent is harming my reputation as a graphics artist and small business. It also dilutes my brand's value as unsuspecting customers may have the perception that my work is not original and other infringing parties will think it's freClosedAmy DononeOrenton HillOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0202-DMCANANAFor years, I have actively enforced my copyrights against unauthorized use. Most infringers are typically located overseas, trying to sell blurry, pixelated/distorted prints that they offer for sale by lazily uploading my images to quick, print-on-demand service websites. I've issued DMCA takedown notices, and after these infringers make a quick buck, they usually delete their accounts and disappear. However, lately there has been a disturbing trend of brazen infringers filing false counter-notices because there is no consequence to them. The burden of proof is on artists like me who the infringers count on not being able to afford the cost, time and emotional turmoil to file a Federal lawsuit against them. I take great pride in my 5-star reviews, providing personal customer service and high quality products to my loyal patrons. Aside from lost revenue, by reproducing and profiting off of counterfeit reproductions of my copyrighted artwork, the Respondent is harming my reputation as a graphics artist and small business. It also dilutes my brand's value as unsuspecting customers may have the perception that my work is not original and other infringing parties will think it's freeClosedAmy DononeJerome ZiltonOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0201infringementAn audiovisual work concerning the evidence found during an underwater search of a reservoir where a deceased missing person and their car were discovered. Additional coverage concerning a discussion of the evidence and the steps taken to obtain it. It is a work of public interest that provides newsworthy information about this missing person case. The work is posted on YouTube and includes a watermarked copyright notice as well as a notice within the comments.On information and belief, Respondents posted an audio visual work that contained in its entirety the Claimant's subject work. Additionally, Claimant's work was reproduced by Respondents in the same form as that published by Claimant. Therefore, the Claimant's work appears to have been directly copied and included within Respondent's work. The infringed material can be found, on information and belief, beginning at the six minute and 30 second mark of the Respondent's video and concluding at the sixteenth minute and 30 second mark. The Respondent's infringing work has been taken down by YouTube and can no longer be viewed at this time based on notice given by Claimant of its infringing nature and Claimant's rights in copyright. However, save for this Claim, the Respondent's work is likely to be re-posted as early as the 14th of September, 2022. The Claimant's video and thus the infringed work can be found on YouTube at the following URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjYNfrb5NJs. Claimant broadly disclosed notice of copyright with the work. Additionally, Claimant filed for copyright registration within a day of publication.Claimant is and has been establishing an ever-growing YouTube channel which reports on and investigates matters of public interest. The current subscriber base is over 16,000 members and the posted videos receive generally thousands to tens of thousands of views with many comments by interested viewers. The Claimant, through this channel, is furthering a market for a certain type of in-depth, detailed, and personal news gathering and distribution of newsworthy events that are not typically known through typical news outlets. Respondent competes in a similar type of market and through infringement of Claimant's works has furthered Respondent's YouTube video channel at the diminished and expense of Claimant's YouTube video channel. Claimant receives revenues from its channel generally through the number of subscribers, views and through paid membership. Respondent, on information and belief, similarly, receives revenues generally based on the number of subscribers and views. As a result, Claimant submits that Claimant has lost revenues through the infringement of Claimant's work while Respondent has profited from it. Thus, these are commercial enterprises. Claimant seeks damaClosedCheckit TVCantor Law PLLCAn All American Cartel LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0200infringementA fictional retelling of the land of Oz and its witchesThey have taken the work distributed on their own devices and try to claim it as their own, including artwork that was not included in the original copyright, and the updated one also artwork I’ve been collecting and making as mock ups for a potential optioning for televised broadcast at a later date. My personal background as a writer and producer, editor and visual effects artist in the industry of entertainment, television, and film with Nickelodeon Studios in universal studios, has prepared me for this type of a fantasy novel, and I have potentially got plenty of character witnesses that I’ve not only worked with collaborated with in the past they can attest to this, including my own work and résumé.In addition to just medical and psychological well-being, these ongoing distractions, literally for the last five years on a daily basis, but more recently attacking my actual work, that has complicated my life (I’m disabled and live with my 71 year old mom), caused me to lose sleep, reputation, security, and stagnate the work, not to mention having to spend a duplicate amount of money on additional copyright updates since I had originally registered the work before I completed it, after the recommendation during a phone call with one of the nice librarians there. This is also cutting into my time- I could’ve been using my spare time for promotion, advertising and marketing etc. since the book is now available from Amazon and for pre-order on Apple Books store.ClosedMichael L McBridenoneEmily ThompsonOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0199-DMCANANAMy artwork is registered by the United States Copyright Office. They are selling stickers of my copyrighted artwork without license or authorization. They are directly interfering with and competing with me by selling my own artwork in their Amazon Store, especially because I also sell this design as a sticker in my Etsy store.ClosedRebecca WangnoneAmazon.comOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0198-DMCANANASelling stickers of my Copyrighted Artwork without authorization or license. They are literally taking money from me, as I sell this exact design as a sticker in my own Etsy and RedBubble stores.ClosedRebecca WangnoneAmazonOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0197-DMCANANAOur Original Photos that were stolen are on our Stocking Factory, LLC website at this location https://stockingfactory.com/collections/christmas-stockings/products/knitted-christmas-stockings-red-ivory-3435 The photos are in registration process with Copyright office, case ID 1-11800819371 The Respondent displaying our photos and offering discounts of 30% or 40% on item on ETSY Marketplace that is infringing caused us harm of at least $2,000ClosedStocking Factory, LLCnoneNikolai CarterOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0196infringementThis was a product review video I created for my Youtube channel as well as for my Amazon store. It is a setup and review video about the Epson ecotank printer. The respondant stole it and placed it on his channel among other works stollen.The video was on Amazon that I uploaded as an influencer video. The respondent stole the video and placed it on his YouTube channel in order to profit from it among every other video on their channel. I filed a copyright claim and Youtube took the video down but the respondent countered using the loophole claiming it was his which now requires me to file a copyright case in order for Youtube to keep it removed.The harm is that the respondent stole and reproduced my work stealing views and potential commissions I would have earned otherwise. I am seeking for the end of using any of my videos.ClosedJakob S WatersnoneYuri SametomanOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0195infringementAmazon Influencer video stolen and is being used on a foreign entity's YouTube channel, where they are profiting from my work.I'm an Amazon Influencer and produced a video, all of my own, using my own voice, my own images, on January 31, 2022. Here is the link to my video produced on Amazon, January 31, 2022. https://www.amazon.com/vdp/0fb91b1fc19841e19efc49fe3af5bcf3. The other party, from Vietnam, stole my video, uploaded my video completely unedited, without permission, without any changes, to their YouTube channel, at a later date. The following, is what they stated to YouTube, upon receiving my copyright strike. "I filed a YouTube Copyright Strike against the other party. Now, the other party is stating they have full usage rights. Please see the following, as it is their quote to YouTube. Hi Youtube Team, I know you are very busy but I have to send this complaint to you, because I have contacted the copyright reporter many times with no response. So I have to file a complaint here. I was sad and worried when I received the copyright warning. I would like to confirm that this Dog Back Seat Cover Protector Waterproof Scratchproof Nonslip Hammock Review is my video created by me, I believe it is your fault because this video was filmed by me, on my computer I still keep the original video. I My YouTube channel and Amazon Influencer sites are both at risk, due to their slanderous claims that my video belongs to them. My YouTube channel is https://www.YouTube.com/c/YetisPlace. My Amazon Influencer, is https://www.amazon.com/shop/yetisplace. I have evidence in my Amazon Influencer affiliate back office, that this content is indeed mine. Here is my specific video they stole. https://www.amazon.com/vdp/0fb91b1fc19841e19efc49fe3af5bcf3 They do not have evidence that this belongs to them. They are not American, they do not speak with an American accent. They feel they can simply go online to another website and steal the content, then proceed to upload it to their YouTube channel, provide their own links to Alibaba, Amazon and other sites where they be paid, based off another party's work. I need to submit this on behalf of the countersuit for my YouTube copyright claim.ClosedHeidi ChurasnoneSema DopaviOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0194-DMCANANAFor years, I have actively enforced my copyrights against unauthorized use. Most infringers are typically located overseas, trying to sell blurry, pixelated/distorted prints that they offer for sale by lazily uploading my images to quick, print-on-demand service websites. I've issued DMCA takedown notices, and after these infringers make a quick buck, they usually delete their accounts and disappear. However, lately there has been a disturbing trend of brazen infringers filing false counter-notices because there is no consequence to them. The burden of proof is on artists like me who the infringers count on not being able to afford the cost, time and emotional turmoil to file a Federal lawsuit against them. I take great pride in my 5-star reviews, providing personal customer service and high quality products to my loyal patrons. Aside from lost revenue, by reproducing and profiting off of poor quality reproductions of my copyrighted artwork, the Respondent is harming my reputation as a graphics artist and small business. It also dilutes my brand's value as unsuspecting customers may have the perception that my work is not original and other infringing parties will think it's freClosedAmy DononeMelody GazendamOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0193-DMCANANAFor years, I have actively enforced my copyrights against unauthorized use. Most infringers are typically located overseas, trying to sell blurry, pixelated/distorted prints that they offer for sale by lazily uploading my images to quick, print-on-demand service websites. I've issued DMCA takedown notices, and after these infringers make a quick buck, they usually delete their accounts and disappear. However, lately there has been a disturbing trend of brazen infringers filing false counter-notices because there is no consequence to them. The burden of proof is on artists like me who the infringers count on not being able to afford the cost, time and emotional turmoil to file a Federal lawsuit against them. I take great pride in my 5-star reviews, providing personal customer service and high quality products to my loyal patrons. Aside from lost revenue, by reproducing and profiting off of poor quality reproductions of my copyrighted artwork, the Respondent is harming my reputation as a graphics artist and small business. It also dilutes my brand's value as unsuspecting customers may have the perception that my work is not original and other infringing parties will think it's freClosedAmy DononeSharon BickfordOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0192-DMCANANAFor years, I have actively enforced my copyrights against unauthorized use. Most infringers are typically located overseas, trying to sell blurry, pixelated/distorted prints that they offer for sale by lazily uploading my images to quick, print-on-demand service websites. I've issued DMCA takedown notices, and after these infringers make a quick buck, they usually delete their accounts and disappear. However, lately there has been a disturbing trend of brazen infringers filing false counter-notices because there is no consequence to them. The burden of proof is on artists like me who the infringers count on not being able to afford the cost, time and emotional turmoil to file a Federal lawsuit against them. I take great pride in my 5-star reviews, providing personal customer service and high quality products to my loyal patrons. Aside from lost revenue, by reproducing and profiting off of poor quality reproductions of my copyrighted artwork, the Respondent is harming my reputation as a graphics artist and small business. It also dilutes my brand's value as unsuspecting customers may have the perception that my work is not original and other infringing parties will think it's freClosedAmy DononeANDRE WILLIAMSOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0191infringementMy PhD dissertationIn the TCAD paper title "SF-SGL: Solver-Free Spectral Graph Learning from Linear Measurements", its section III A "Gradient Estimation via Perturbation Analysis", section III "Theorem III.1", section III D "Key Steps in the SGL Algorithm" are all directly copied from the chapter 4 of my PhD dissertation (https://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/etdr/1160/)They copied my PhD dissertation. My dissertation is my hard work during my PhD study. I paid a lot of effort to do the research, develop the method and write the dissertation.ClosedYongyu WangnoneZhuo FengOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0190-DMCANANAThe listing has been re-activated due to the false counter notice filed, profit will be made off of my design illegally without license or my permission, potentially harming my sales, and it will cause confusion among the public and potential customers regarding the true origin of the design. It may cause potential customers to believe that Venuston owns and created that design when they definitely do not. The listing can be seen here: https://www.etsy.com/listing/1267213422/electric-flying-elf-wings-moth-wings?click_key=23c35769c416ae8e6d5228e2780953cb86398625%3A1267213422&click_sum=676ed3e9&ga_search_query=wings&ref=shop_items_search_1ClosedAngela M JarmannoneWeiwei XinOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0189infringementHipHop song rhyming the lyrics and spelling out the words of the Chorus K-I-s-s-I-n-g with a long sing on the 5th letterThe chorus of this song is a duplicate of my chorus Spelling out the 7 letter word ‘Kissing’ https://music.apple.com/us/album/just-relax/1638216655 and dragging (Long Sing) the 5th letter ‘I’ in kissing and finishing up with the last two letters. It’s so bad that they took a 5 letter word and turned it into a 7 letter word by repeating the 1st two letters twice just so that it has 7 letters and then they also dragged out (Long Sing) the 5th letter in the word ‘e’ closing it out with the last two letters. https://youtu.be/j5uAR9w7LBg It’s basically the potatoes of the song giving it a unusual one two punch to captivate the audience. The same 7 letters, The same Dragged out 5th letter, The Same genre of musicAlthough copywriten in 2012. This song ‘Kissing’ hasn’t been placed on major outlets (Spotify, itunes etc.) until 2022. The same year ‘Super Freaky Girl’ came out using my ‘hook’ and doing very well. The 30k in damages seeked are not close to how much is being made off my ‘hook’ right now including all types of awards and nomination for best song of the summer. I’m looking for the max CCB settlement of 30kClosedALKASHIF M MarshallnoneNiki Minaj/Cash MoneyOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0188infringementDesign to create a Advent Calendar using 3mm or 1/8th materialBen Astle is selling my design as his own. I also have proof of when he purchased the design from me. In the purchase it is stated that he may not sell or distribute the design only use it to make the actual item.People are buying the design from him costing me sales.ClosedChad E RobertsonnoneBenjamin AstleOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0187infringementPhotograph of a woman's faceThe image is used without authorization or valid license.The claimants primary source of income is through the licensing of photographic imagery. This infringer used the claimants copyrighted imagery without permission, payment, or license, depriving the claimant of their primary source of income from works created for such purpose.ClosedDana HurseynoneWild Sky Media - dba / mamaslatinas.com22-CCB-0187 Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0186infringementThis is a compilation video of my UFO experiences over the last three years that I shared on the Global Peace Tribe webcast and on my YouTube channel John Martin UFO and ET IntelligencesThe Corridor Crew, without my permission illegally used tiny snippets of my compilation video to ridicule me and my work to an audience of over a million viewers to date. The video in question was @ the 11 minute mark for 46 seconds. They have taken out my section after my complaint to them, but only after 1.7 million viewers had seen their handiwork: https://youtu.be/CVjC1wfovz0 Sam Gorski put on his tiny sunglasses and did his best Dr. Evil laugh while he and his compatriots proceeding to ridicule my work from their hatchet job of taking tiny snippets of my videos completely out of context, while ignored anything that did not fit their debunking narrative. They purposely ignored the nearly twenty minutes of compelling evidence presented in my original video and further called me an idiot, that I would be pissing my pants and various other derogatory terms while quickly dismissing me and my work to potentially their five plus million subscribers. The video had over 1.17 million views before they wrote to me in an incredibly condescending way and eventually took my segment down with no apology, but rather with the same arrogance they displayed on the offending video. TThe reckless and vicious comments and cherry picking of tiny segments of my original work have been devastating to me personally and has caused grave damage to my name and my YouTube channel. They used this work without permission and did not have the basic courtesy of even notifying me that they would be ridiculing my work to potentially all their millions of subscribers. I have a book that I am releasing in the next few weeks, The Universe Loves You. This disparaging of my work to potential buyers of my book has been devastating to me personally and financially. I feel compensatory damages of $30,000 is appropriate in this case. Submitted this day, October 03, 2022 John MartinCertifiedJohn MartinnoneSam GorskiRequest to Link John Cl Martin with the John Martin party
22-CCB-0185infringementA shipping crate for the use with toy dolls toy boxReproducing my registered design and copies of my original designI designed this crate for use with toy dolls this person has copied my work and Selling the work which is having a negative impact on my salesClosedLinda BeamnoneKirk DepauwOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0184infringementA photograph taken of Personalized Christmas Stockings published on our websiteOn Sept 26, 2022 we have filed an infringement DMCA notice against 2 sellers on Etsy who illegally copied and used our photographs in the product listing for sale on Etsy. Etsy advised us that one of the infringers filed a counter-notice and in order to prevent the infringer from using our photo, a court action needs to be initiated within 10 days. Etsy provided us with the infringer's contact details, whom we have designated as a responder. In the document section, I am providing a screenshot of the listing by the infringner, the document name is: screencapture-etsy-listing-1289038730-personalized-knitted-christmas-stockings-2022-09-26-10_13_24.pdf the listing on Etsy is https://www.etsy.com/listing/1289038730 it currently shows unavailable as Etsy took it down In the document section I am enclosing a PDF of our Etsy takedown action and a PDF of Etsy response that the infringer filed a counter notice.The infringer is copying our for sale listing on Etsy, including the photographs and selling the same listing at a significantly lower price using our photographs, effectively reducing our sales. We have suffered at least $2,000 damages as our sales on our item significantly decreased as Etsy customers think they are purchasing our item from the infringer at a reduced price.ClosedStocking Factory, LLCnoneAndrea HutchensOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0183infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant Tom Schirmacher is a fashion and beauty photographer who licenses his work to major brands. Claimant is the creator and sole rights holder an original beauty image. Respondent is the owner and operator of the Instagram @thealloramedspa and a Facebook page for Allora Medical Spa, which are both social media pages that promote and advertisesthe Respondent’s spa business. On or about May 2022, Claimant discovered his photograph being displayed on Respondent's Instagam page and Respondent’s Facebook page in promotion of its services.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.CertifiedTom SchirmacherThe Law Firm of Higbee and AssociatesAllora Medical SpaSecond Notice sent on 3/15/23
22-CCB-0182infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant Tom Schirmacher is a fashion and beauty photographer who licenses his work to major brands. Claimant is the creator and sole rights holder an original beauty image. Respondent is the owner and operator of the Instagram @bellisimospa_lasercenter which is a social media page that promotes and advertises the Respondent’s spa business. On or about April 2022, Claimant discovered his photograph being displayed on Respondent's Instagam page in promotion of its services.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.CertifiedTom SchirmacherThe Law Firm of Higbee and AssociatesBellisimo European Day Spa, LLCOrder for Claimant to Pay Second Filing Fee and For All Parties to Register for eCCB
22-CCB-0181infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant Florian Sommet is a commercial photographer who shoots ads for major brands. Claimant is the creator and sole rights holder to three cosmetics photographs. Respondent is the owner and operator of the Instagram @bellisimospa_lasercenter which is a social media page that promotes and advertises the Respondent’s spa business. On or about April 2022, Claimant discovered that their photographs were being displayed on Respondent's Instagam page in promotion of its services.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.ClosedFlorian SommetThe Law Firm of Higbee and AssociatesBellisimo European Day Spa, LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0180infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant Mark Johnson is a professional photographer, specializing in outdoor on-location photography. Claimant is the creator and sole rights holder to an aerial image of Honolulu at dusk. Respondent is operator of the website a yelp page which he uses to promote his real estate business and endeavors. On or about May 2020, Claimant discovered that their photograph was being displayed on Respondent's yelp page, directly promoting Respondent’s business.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.ClosedMark A JohnsonThe Law Firm of Higbee and AssociatesRichard DeGutisOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0179infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant Ali Smith is a portrait and documentary photographer based in New York City. Claimant is the creator and sole rights holder to an image of actors Jemima Kirke and Alex Cameron. Respondent is the owner and operator of the website https://www.nextmanagement.com/ which is a website that advertises and promotes the Respondent’s model management business. On or about May 2022, Claimant discovered that their photograph was being displayed on Respondent's website in a post directly promoting it’s model booking services.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.CertifiedAli SmithThe Law Firm of Higbee and AssociatesNext Management LLCClaim Response
22-CCB-0178infringementComputer program and audiovisual material, including level design, 3D models, texture images.The Infringing Content is displayed on competitor server Summit Cinema ("Summit"), owned by a Mr. Connor McKelvey (“McKelvey”), an individual who formerly contributed to the Work pursuant to a work-for-hire agreement (“Agreement”) with Copyright Owner and is no longer employed under the Agreement. During his contracted work, McKelvey maintained a positive relationship with Copyright Owner, which quickly deteriorated after McKelvey left Copyright Owner to launch his competing server Summit. Summit contains significant and substantial portions of the Work, and McKelvey failed to obtain consent from Copyright Owner prior to uploading the Infringing Content. We have strong evidence showing that McKelvey is willfully and purposefully copying the Work in order to attract users away from Swamp and towards Summit. Furthermore, we have abundant evidence showing that McKelvey’s infringement of the Work is not only willful, but done as part of a malicious, hostile, and unprovoked campaign of harassment, defamation, and doxing targeting the Copyright Owner.Lost licensing fees; lost profits; dilution of value/licensing fee; and tarnishment of Claimant's work. Claimant is seeking $30,000.00 in damages for the infringement.CertifiedSwamp Servers LLC d/b/a Swamp ServersChristensen O'Connor Johnson Kindness PLLCConnor McKelveyClaim Response
22-CCB-0177infringementMy artistic creation, content, materials, video footage and name for documentary film that examines wrongful conviction cases in America.Your Honor, Thank you so much for the opportunity to present this matter before the CCB. Please find below a brief background of the issue: In March of 2015, I hired Mark Saxenmeyer of The Reporters Inc. a Minneapolis-based media production agency to assist with fundraising and perform certain production work for completion of my documentary film series titled: The Innocent Convicts. A fundraising contract and Project Assistance Area Agreement(see attached please) were drafted by The Reporters Inc. Executive Director, Mark Saxenmeyer which expressly provides ownership of all videos created for The Innocent Convicts project belong to me and my studio-Mankind Pictures. I paid the sum of $250 out of $500 which was due as project initiation fee as stated in that agreement. Although I initially titled the Project Tim Cole, The Innocent Man, I renamed it The Innocent Convicts in 2015 due to the need to include more stories to the Film project. I started with filming the story of Tim Cole in Texas and three years later, we had completed production of six stories that happened in five different cities with a timeline of completion set for 2016/17. The project was not completed aI have made multiple request for the raw and completed copies of the videos in the possession of Mark Saxenmeyer and The Reporters Inc., and they have refused to provide the videos to me. I also requested a detailed breakdown of funds raised as well as Expenditure report and all materials related to the film. Mark Saxenmeyer has seized the raw and final work product of The Innocent Convicts film unlawfully and has refused to provide accounting for the money raise for this project which is a breach of our agreement. Mark Saxenmeyer has continued to distribute The Innocent Convicts film online and at educational institutions without my permission, and has continued to profit from my work without my consent. See attached letters on behalf of the Reporters Inc. to me and vice versa please. Also attached are the Agenda and Minutes of the Reporters Inc. Board Meeting in 2016, and Email indicating title name change.. Only towards the third quarter of last year we heard from Mark's lawyer after l contacted another attorney based in Minneapolis to reach out to him. On the Reporters Inc. website, they removed my film about Tim Cole and renamed my other 5 films "Guilty Until Proven InnClosedOsagie OkoruwanoneMark SaxenmeyerOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0176infringementWebsite text and headingsKidsVelo Bikes directly copied large paragraphs of our website text without our consent.KidsVelo bikes plagiarized our unique content, this is bad for google rankings and therefore bad for our online sales. They copied the text from our page https://www.littlebigbikes.com/balance-bikes-guide/ including headings and paragraph text.ClosedSimon EvansnoneKidvelo BikesOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0175Not availableNANANot availableClosedSee captionNot availableSee captionOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0174infringement-DMCANone givenThe infringers copies the right owner's work and used it to sell their products on Amazon.comThe right owner suffered economic loss in reduced sales from the alleged infringing activities. The right owner is seeking (i) an injunctive relief that the infringer cease and desist their infringing activities, (ii) compensatory damages against all three infringers and (iii) statutory damages against the three infringers, jointly and severally up to the statutory limit of this Board.ClosedYi Wu Shi Han Mao Dian Zi Shang Wu Shang HangLance LiuHuishan ZhengOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0173infringementApplication IconOn March 14, 2020, the copyright holder's representative sent the infringing developer's representative a business offer containing the copyrighted application icon. On March 30, 2020, the developer's representative confirmed sending the copyrighted application icon inclusive content to the developer. See discovery evidence: https://www.dropbox.com/s/67mdxxnw6gcosdq/Crinimal%20Copyright%20Infringement%20Evidence.pdf?dl=0 .IPA Version 4.31 released September of 2022 infringes with an unauthorized derivative work of VA0002315168, see iOS app 'willful' infringement and unauthorized derivative icon work: hhttps://www.dropbox.com/s/8daqits618uw1pk/IMG_0123.jpg?dl=0 - Apple Inc is not licensed or implied to have a license to 17 USC 101 U.S. registered copyright logo. PNC is willfully infringing said registered copyright, did not independently create the infringing icon. Copyright owner contacted Apple Inc, the distributor of the infringing content, and Apple responded but did not comply to the DMCA takedown request to enable a DMCA Safe Harbor status, please see evidence: https://www.dropbox.com/s/u75umnwg40ki7v9/PNC%20DMCA.pdf?dl=0Apple Inc refusal to comply to the DMCA takedown request is preventing their infringing developer from taking a Term Sheet "Derivative License" for the global distributed infringement. As of .IPA app version distribution, Apple Inc has not enabled their DMCA Safe Harbor option before the ongoing infringing updated .IPA version release of 4.31 - Copyright holder seeks max willful Infringement CCB recovery of $30,000 for infringing .IPA version 4.31 - The copyright holder's home District Court jurisdiction in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Should Apple Inc opt out of CCB, the copyright owner will seek lost profits of the Term Sheet amount Apple Inc was in witness of submission to their infringing developer.ClosedWilliam GrecianoneApple IncOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0172infringementApplication Icon DesignOn August 17, 2020, PayPal Inc received and responded to an IP evaluation of Registered Copyright VA0002315168, see here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/8arjcx0o21iqryy/DD-Icon%20Copyright.png?dl=0 - PayPal's head of IP Anup Tikku was the receiving party for PayPal, see here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/wj62fdrch9fmm38/PayPal_Anup.pdf?dl=0 - .IPA Version 8.25.1 released September of 2022 infringes with an unauthorized derivative work of VA0002315168, see iOS app 'willful' infringement and unauthorized derivative icon work: https://www.dropbox.com/s/35fy1b901abn9sg/IMG_0069.jpg?dl=0 - Apple Inc is not licensed or implied to have a license to 17 USC 101 U.S. registered copyright logo. PayPal Inc is willfully infringing said registered copyright, did not independently create the infringing icon. Copyright owner contacted Apple Inc, the distributor of the infringing content, and Apple responded but did not comply to the DMCA takedown request to enable a DMCA Safe Harbor status, please see evidence: https://www.dropbox.com/s/m1l6qwa7mqte1mv/PayPal%20DMA.pdf?dl=0Apple Inc refusal to comply to the DMCA takedown request is preventing their infringing developer from taking a Term Sheet "Derivative License" for the global distributed infringement. As of .IPA app version distribution, Apple Inc has not enabled their DMCA Safe Harbor option before the ongoing infringing updated .IPA version release of 8.26.0 - Copyright holder seeks max willful Infringement CCB recovery of $30,000 for infringing .IPA version 8.26.0 - The copyright holder's home District Court jurisdiction in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Should Apple Inc opt out of CCB, the copyright owner will seek lost profits of the Term Sheet amount Apple Inc was in witness of submission to their infringing developer.ClosedWilliam GrecianoneApple IncOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0171infringementMusic and lyricsThis is derivative work both his song and my song are both played B Major and G#Minor I can sing my song with his and he can sing his with mine they are played the exact same way my song is called I can be your hero his song is called Hero. His song is definitely inspired from me and is stolen from me I'm saying I can be your hero his song is saying he can't be your hero he took my composition and added some new stuff in it and change the lyrics and added new alterations but it's still the same song.He got over millions and millions of steams off of spotify and and got thousands and thousands of plays off of Pandora and other streaming sites he stole my dream from me people think he wrote this song and created it and that's not true I haven't got none of success he got from the song and I wrote and produce it I only got thousand play off of spotify and hundred of of other streaming sites.ClosedDerrick BelmarnoneMatthew PfahlOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0170infringementNone givenThey used my name without my written consent.I suffered harm as a result to this activity because they used my name on a document to cause me financial harm and defamation of character. I never gave the respondent written consent to use my name on any of their documents. The relief I'm seeking is $5000 for monetary damages and for the respondents not to use my copyrighted information indefinitely.ClosedJermaine ApplewhitenoneIL DEPT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES DIVISION OF CHILD SUPPORT SERVICESOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0169-DMCANANAFor years, I have actively enforced my copyrights against unauthorized use. Most infringers are typically located overseas, trying to sell blurry, pixelated/distorted prints that they offer for sale by lazily uploading my images to quick, print-on-demand service websites. I've issued DMCA takedown notices, and after these infringers make a quick buck, they usually delete their accounts and disappear. However, lately there has been a disturbing trend of brazen infringers filing false counter-notices because there is no consequence to them. The burden of proof is on artists like me who the infringers count on not being able to afford the cost, time and emotional turmoil to file a Federal lawsuit against them. I take great pride in my 5-star reviews, providing personal customer service and high quality products to my loyal patrons. Aside from lost revenue, by reproducing and profiting off of poor quality reproductions of my copyrighted artwork, the Respondent is harming my reputation as a graphics artist and small business. It also dilutes my brand's value as unsuspecting customers may have the perception that my work is not original and other infringing parties will think it's freClosedAmy DononeJeff ReggianiOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0168-DMCANANAFor years, I have actively enforced my copyrights against unauthorized use. Most infringers are typically located overseas, trying to sell blurry, pixelated/distorted prints that they offer for sale by lazily uploading my images to quick, print-on-demand service websites. I've issued DMCA takedown notices, and after these infringers make a quick buck, they usually delete their accounts and disappear. However, lately there has been a disturbing trend of brazen infringers filing false counter-notices because there is no consequence to them. The burden of proof is on artists like me who the infringers count on not being able to afford the cost, time and emotional turmoil to file a Federal lawsuit against them. I take great pride in my 5-star reviews, providing personal customer service and high quality products to my loyal patrons. Aside from lost revenue, by reproducing and profiting off of poor quality reproductions of my copyrighted artwork, the Respondent is harming my reputation as a graphics artist and small business. It also dilutes my brand's value as unsuspecting customers may have the perception that my work is not original and other infringing parties will think it's freClosedAmy DononeSonia GarnesOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0167-DMCANANAFor years, I have actively enforced my copyrights against unauthorized use. Most infringers are typically located overseas, trying to sell blurry, pixelated/distorted prints that they offer for sale by lazily uploading my images to quick, print-on-demand service websites. I've issued DMCA takedown notices, and after these infringers make a quick buck, they usually delete their accounts and disappear. However, lately there has been a disturbing trend of brazen infringers filing false counter-notices because there is no consequence to them. The burden of proof is on artists like me who the infringers count on not being able to afford the cost, time and emotional turmoil to file a Federal lawsuit against them. I take great pride in my 5-star reviews, providing personal customer service and high quality products to my loyal patrons. Aside from lost revenue, by reproducing and profiting off of poor quality reproductions of my copyrighted artwork, the Respondent is harming my reputation as a graphics artist and small business. It also dilutes my brand's value as unsuspecting customers may have the perception that my work is not original and other infringing parties will think it's freClosedAmy DononeFrancis Ortiz FornesOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0166-DMCANANADamage to the reputation of my brand and many dissatisfied customers. The infringer is selling his low quality product under my photo. Statutory Damages - $2000 Costs and attorney’s fees - $500 Temporary and/or final injunction to restrain infringement of my copyright.ClosedIgor ShtylenkononeNAVEDOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0165infringementNone givenThe infringing sites have taken my book that I've licensed to other platforms and put it in public for free.Due to the infringment, it directly led to the continuous decline in the income of the authors we signed.We hope that the pirated websites will apologize to us and immediately remove our exclusive works.We tried many ways to leave messages often without contacting the infringing website. Finally, we tried to find the service provider, but they cannot give the invaild message and don't deal with it.Awaiting amendment/certificationREAD ASAP LTDnoneCLOUDFLARE, INC.Amended Claim
22-CCB-0164infringementCompositionTITLE 17 USC Section 501 . Infringement of Sound Recording rightsHas not been paid royalties on the masters side.ClosedLangston M ChildsnoneDaniel CottonOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0163infringementPhotograph of a couple walking together in a parkThe image in question was used on a public facing commercial website promoting the services of Roger E QuinneyThe claimants primary source of income is through the licensing of photographic imagery. This infringer used the claimants copyrighted imagery without permission, payment, or license, depriving the claimant of their primary source of income from works created for such purpose.CertifiedDana HurseynoneROGER E QUINNEYSecond Default Notice
22-CCB-0162infringementSongRespondent unlawfully, and without authorization from Claimant, copied Claimant's copyrighted sound recordings, made unauthorized derivative works of those sound recordings by synchronizing them to promotional videos/advertisements and distributed and publicly performed those video advertisements by uploading them to the www.youtube.com website.Lost licensencing fees, lost profits, dilution of value/license fee. Claimant is seeking $30,000 in damages for each work infringed.CertifiedFreeplay Music, LLCAbrams Fensterman LLPLinclon Property CompanyProof of Service
22-CCB-0161infringementYellow enamel pin with banner and footprintsCounterfeit copies of my original design are being sold online.Seller is infringing on my sales on the same platform. This is the second time this seller has taken down and then relisted my original artwork. She is KNOWINGLY infringing after multiple requests to takedownClosedSnarky Crafter Designs Inc.noneDanielle BennettOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0160-DMCANANAFor years, I have actively enforced my copyrights against unauthorized use. Most infringers are typically located overseas, trying to sell blurry, pixelated/distorted prints that they offer for sale by lazily uploading my images to quick, print-on-demand service websites. I've issued DMCA takedown notices, and after these infringers make a quick buck, they usually delete their accounts and disappear. However, lately there has been a disturbing trend of brazen infringers filing false counter-notices because there is no consequence to them. The burden of proof is on artists like me who the infringers count on not being able to afford the cost, time and emotional turmoil to file a Federal lawsuit against them. I take great pride in my 5-star reviews, providing personal customer service and high quality products to my loyal patrons. Aside from lost revenue, by reproducing and profiting off of poor quality reproductions of my copyrighted artwork, the Respondent is harming my reputation as a graphics artist and small business. It also dilutes my brand's value as unsuspecting customers may have the perception that my work is not original and other infringing parties will think it's freClosedAmy DononeJason OslinOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0159-DMCANANAThe market for the original video is entirely removed, deliberately, by the site's self hosting of it instead of providing a link to the video itself which is freely accessible. Due to the owner misusing copyright exemption laws in a very direct and deliberate way, the relief sought is that they no longer retain safe harbor protection.ClosedWhiteForestnoneLolcow LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0158infringementCommercial photo of a man sitting at a table having an office teleconference with other people on a large computer screen.Acuity Network Services was using an unauthorized reproduction of the Cisco TelePresence Webex Meeting Photograph to advertise its own competing products and services on its own website.In 2013, I was engaged by Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”) to do an extensive photo shoot in Oslo for Cisco’s marketing materials. Total billing for production, fees, etc. for that shoot was over $100,000, which included the hiring of several models. As part of that project, I set up and created a photo for Cisco’s Webex Meeting suite of products. Cisco received a lifetime license to use the Webex Meeting Photograph, which Cisco has indeed used in connection with marketing its products. Photograph is protected by U.S. Copyright Registration No. VAu 1-138-361. (Cisco web use: https://www.cisco.com/c/en_in/products/conferencing/webex-meeting-center/index.html) Acuity’s use of the Cisco Webex Meeting Photograph illegally took the economic value that Cisco invested, and my future potential re-licensing and used the photo in direct competition with Cisco’s products, in violation of U.S. and state laws of unfair competition and false advertising. Moreover, Acuity’s unauthorized use of the Cisco Webex Meeting Photograph violates the rights of publicity of the models shown in Acuity’s infringing image, who did not give Acuity any rights to commercially reproduce their likenesses. ThoseCertifiedJordan ReedernoneAcuity Network Services22-CCB-0158 Service Packet
22-CCB-0157infringementwebsiteI am the owner of the site https://veha.ua and the trademark "ВЕХА". Information copied from my site. Information without my consent is displayed on the site https://vekha.com.ua (may need to be enabled to display VPN)1. Loss of customers ($5,000 per year) 2. Deterioration of the site's position in GoogleClosedDenis PlakhotnikovnoneEugene KorolevOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0156infringementRoss Fulton (aka) Alebrelle discusses a few films, then makes Jell-O and a few other food items in their kitchen.The infringing activity is extensive and the short summary is as follows: Mr. Kis took extensively from my library of videos and other content. He infringed upon 10 different videos in 17 different segments, as well as displaying an art for hire piece that I use as my primary branding. In a work of just over 15 minutes in length my material accounts for 4 minutes 24 seconds for just over 28% of the runtime of his derivitive and infringing work. The account of the title of each of my videos and the timelogs of the periods during Mr Kis's work in which they appear are listed in full here: 1:08-1:20, 9:29-9:51 - "Alebrelle talking about Destiny's child" 1:22-1:32, 12:15-12:29, 12:41-15:55 - "Jellies and puddings? Next thing you'll tell me there's ochre and trolls in this kitchen." 1:32-1:37, 13:57-14:26 - "No circus, no monkeys. Have a chill day where we just hang out and putz around on the computer." 1:57-2:09 - "Even further pudding and beyond." 1:59-2:01 - Branding Artwork 3:33-3:46, 9:51-10:32 - "How can you CONSTANTLY garden, anyway? Seems excessive." 3:49-3:54 - "TRAIN PLATFORMS NAZIS" 4:18-4:39, 8:39-8:58 - "My Girlfriend Makes Comments I Don't Like About MyThe harm suffered from the work of Mr. Kis is devaluation of licensure of important and newsworthy material that I hold under my copyright, as well as reputational damage by using my material in ways to which I object and do not meet my artistic standards. As a creator who works extensively in the LGBTQ+ and general political spheres my reputation is my livelihood. In 2018 a newsworthy short video segment of mine licensed to a small YouTube channel for $250 dollars. Requested remedies for damages are as follows: 1) Immediate cessation and removal of the infringing works. 2) Public apology admitting wrongdoing on defendant's YouTube channel where original infringement occured of at least 60 seconds duration. 3) Compensatory damages for twice license fees for potential lost revenue ($250 x 2), filing fees for both this suit ($100) fees for the registration of copyright ($45), and 5 hours labor self representation legal fees @ $20/hr ($100). Total compensatory damages of $745. 4) Punitive damages for grossly negligent infringement and for what accounts to a press tour against me in retaliation because of initiation of these legal proceedings that has spanned severaClosedRoss FultonnoneGábor KisOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0155infringementAbandoned homes on the Isle de Jean Charles in LouisianaRespondent reproduced, displayed, and distributed an unauthorized copy of Claimant’s Photograph on populationeducation.org, despite the presence of a copyright notice indicating Julie Dermansky as the rightsholder. Respondent Population Connection owns and operates the program ‘Population Education’, whose website (populationeducation.org) was where the infringing article was posted. Claimant never authorized Respondent to reproduce, publish, display, or make use of any kind of the Photograph.$15,000: - Lost license fees/royalties - Disgorgement of Respondent’s profitsClosedJulie DermanskyLeichtman Law PLLCPopulation ConnectionOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0154infringementProducts for sale on AmazonWe designed this image in 2016, doing offline brick and mortar business, but we found that a large number of products are produced in China, and the manufacturer is located in China, which infringes our patent and is not authorized by us Valid intellectual property registration number: VA0002315802 We can see in detail on the product details page and product pictures that the product uses the dragon pattern designed by our company (registration number: VA0002315802) We have retained screenshots of relevant infringement evidence: https://postimg.cc/gallery/Mz37RJX This seriously violates the rights and interests of intellectual property rights holders We believe Amazon is protecting infringing sellers when reporting infringement has such clear evidence I have a good faith belief that the above content violates my rights above or the rights held by the rights holder and that it is unlawful to use the content. I represent, under penalty of perjury, that the information contained in this notice is accurate and that I am the owner of the above rights or its agent. ASIN(s) of the product(s) and Marketplace. Please include all impacted ASINs for the same listing issue, We have repeatedly asked Amazon to complain about infringement Amazon has been shielding infringing sellersClosedDongguan Xinmao Electronic Commerce Co., LtdnoneshenzhenshibaikechuangxinkejiyouxiangongsiOrder Denying Request to Link allbert huang with the Dongguan Xinmao Electronic Commerce Co., Ltd party
22-CCB-0153infringementArtwork is a Starbucks parody of a girl in a striped shirt crying while wearing a protest hat with the words Liberal Tears going around the logo.Artwork is being reproduced and sold on a t-shirt without permission, or payment of a licensing fee. When I contacted Google for a DMCA, the infringing company filed a counterclaim against me.The infringing company is causing confusion in the market by claiming my art as their own. My years of marketing have been harmed by the distribution of my artwork previously enjoyed without competition for profits in my own shops. Search engine webpage results, image search results, and paid Google shopping campaigns by the infringer have caused my original ecommerce sources to be diluted by their marketing. Infringer has filed a false statement of infringement again me with Google. Infringer continues to publish my artwork by creating URL redirects to skirt the Google takedown. Infringer has done this all while already having been provided my US Copyright documentation. I am seeking statutory damages in the amount of $30,000.ClosedGeorge T JonesnoneNemoPremium LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0152-DMCANANAWe received a number of demands and claims from the CBD Advertising Agency LTD clients, because they were frustrated with https://cbdadvertising.agency/ services, but because of the same design they desided that we are the same website. Our employees spent hour spent hours of work explaining that we have nothing in common with https://cbdadvertising.agency/.ClosedLocal Profy LLCnoneCBD Advertising Agency LTDOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0151-DMCANANAFor years, I have actively enforced my copyrights against unauthorized use. Most infringers are typically located overseas, trying to sell blurry, pixelated/distorted prints that they offer for sale by lazily uploading my images to quick, print-on-demand service websites. I've issued DMCA takedown notices, and after these infringers make a quick buck, they usually delete their accounts and disappear. However, lately there has been a disturbing trend of brazen infringers filing false counter-notices because there is no consequence to them. The burden of proof is on artists like me who the infringers count on not being able to afford the cost, time and emotional turmoil to file a Federal lawsuit against them. I take great pride in my 5-star reviews, providing personal customer service and high quality products to my loyal patrons. Aside from lost revenue, by reproducing and profiting off of poor quality reproductions of my copyrighted artwork, the Respondent is harming my reputation as a graphics artist and small business. It also dilutes my brand's value as unsuspecting customers may have the perception that my work is not original and other infringing parties will think it's freClosedAmy DononePinelli StewartOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0150infringement-DMCAThe Cyber Garden Reflective Print - A Pictorial and graphic features identified separately from and capable of existing independently of the utilitarian aspects of a useful article.Unauthorized reproduction and distribution of Dolls Kill's copyrighted work, and misrepresentation of facts in counter-notice sent to the service provider.Loss of revenue and goodwill and/or reputation Relief sought: Actual damages suffered as a result of the infringement and any profits of the infringer that are attributable to the infringement and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages.ClosedDolls Kill, Inc.noneDexter RenterOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0149infringementPhotograph of the family room of a home located in Johnston, IAKerry Bern (Claimant) is a professional architecture/interior photographer with over 10 years of experience based in Ankeny, IA. Claimant is the creator and copyright owner of the photograph 250A9084.jpg. The photograph was first published on July 22nd, 2018. Claimant registered the photograph with the USCO under Registration Certificate VA 2-123-376 with an effective date of registration of September 19th, 2018. Respondent is a home remodeling firm located in Fort Worth, TX. Respondent owns and operates the website www.luxuryhomeremodelingdfw.com and Facebook page www.facebook.com/luxuryhomeremodelingdfw which it uses to promote its business. On or about December 20th, 2021, Claimant discovered his photograph being used on the Respondent’s website claiming it represents a home remodel project that the Respondent completed in Frisco, TX. Claimant did not grant permission for Respondent to copy, display or distribute his photograph on Respondent’s website or Facebook page to promote Respondent’s business. Claimant retained the law firm SRIP Law to attempt to negotiate a settlement with the Respondent. SRIP Law emailed a demand letter to the Respondent on February 16th, 2022Since the Claimant timely registered the work under section 412, Claimant elects an award of statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I).CertifiedKerry BernnoneLuxury Home Remodeling DFWResponse to Order to Show Cause
22-CCB-0148infringementphoto of bride and groomI’m here to collect $5000 from Island Entertainment and Spring House Hotel. The business took a photograph of mine and used it in 2 magazine print advertisements over the course of the year. They did not have permission or the rights to that photo. I learned when confronting them over this issue that they were about to take out a third advertisement. Each advertisement cost $5,000. They spent money to advertise the business, but did not properly pay for the art used in that advertisement. I sent the owner Frank an invoice to collect the fees for the use of that photo in a commercial advertisement. He repeatedly refused my invoices and tried to intimidate and shame me for the simple practice of collecting payment for my work and time. When I called again to pursue the invoice after 6+months of it going ignored, he paid lawyers to send me a cease and desist order to prevent me from communicating with his business and pursuing payment. He claims he understood he had the rights to use this photo. He did not. I have in writing that I gave his marketing manager permission to share a photo of mine in social media, with an explicit credit to my account. No other use case. This permiI would receive multiple inquries a year and opportunites to photograph weddings at the spring house hotel which i can no longer take because of this issue and the 'cease and decease' their lawyers sent me, also in good faith- they stole from me. I lost 4500$ worth of business billing hours as a result of pursuing this claim including all the information gathering and communications with the defendants lawyers.ClosedMikhail Glabets Photography LCCnoneIsland entertainment dba Spring House HotelOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0147-DMCANANAAs a self-employed person - journalist and analyst on a freelance, my articles are my only source of income, and the specialty and uniqueness of my work help me to support myself. So, the use of my intellectual property (my articles) without my permission deprives me of my means of livelihood. Based on that, I kindly ask you to oblige the resource moshennik.eu and online service provider Google.com to remove my articles from the website moshennik.eu and Google search results.ClosedEkaterina BlagayanoneViktor DobroserdovOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0146infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 242: Khabib Nurmagomedov vs. Dustin Poirier mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on September 7, 2019 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Tango Bravo Charlie, Inc. and Thomas Halverson (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Shooters Bar & Grille located at 6 N. Maple, Watertown, SD 57201 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondent Thomas Halverson is an individual who resides in the State of SoutClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisTango Bravo Charlie, Inc.Payment of Second Filing Fee
22-CCB-0145infringementshort video of eagles locking talonsMy video clip copyright # 1-11692301741 was taken from my Instagram account, cropped to remove my watermark which read "Mark Smith Photography" and then used twice in their video at the above referenced url. The moment I learned of this, I filed a complaint with Youtube. Youtube responded quickly and removed the video. The respondent emailed me the following day offering to pay a small licensing fee for the stolen content. I did not respond. The respondent emailed again a couple of days later asking me to name a price for licensing the video. I responded with a price of $50,000. The respondent refused my offer and filed a counter claim stating fair use.My video clip that was stolen is widely known and was used in a way that shed bad light on me. The stolen clip was used alongside other graphic content that I would never associate myself with. My reputation as an ethical wildlife photographer was damaged. The respondent also monetized the video profiting off of my hard work.ClosedDaniel M SmithnoneUmair ZaibOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0144infringementPhotographMr. Beck copied and posted Mr. Andrews' copyrighted photographs to Mr. Beck's Facebook feed without proper license or permission from Mr. Andrews. Mr. Beck copied and posted Mr. Andrews' copyrighted photographs to illustrate a advertisement for a rental property.Mr. Andrews is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Andrews charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Beck failed to properly license eighteen of Mr. Andrews' copyrighted photographs.ClosedPhilip AndrewsThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.John T BeckOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0143infringementApplication Icon DesignWillful Infringement: a representative of Wells Fargo received a copy of the infringed work in March 2018: Sent to Wells Fargo by William Grecia representative: https://share.icloud.com/photos/0b38ex0VdkwoMSeN8FeDbfPMw Confirm receive by Wells Fargo Zelle representative: https://share.icloud.com/photos/027Cvt5c_EwYdLLBPWAtTYW4gWells Fargo is has allowed collusion from its owned subsidiary Early Warning Services LLC to use illegal anti-trust methods to stop and limit William Grecia’s entry into the market since 2017. William Grecia seeks the full $30,000 remedy while retaining the right to Opt Out to a full Copyright Infringement filing pending on the discovery production of total distributed users of the Wells Fargo online and mobiles apps in the home district of EDPA.ClosedWilliam GrecianoneWells Fargo & CompanyOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0142infringementIcon Design for applicationsThe infringer's representative received a tangible copy of the copyright owner's protected design on March 14, 2020. See discovery evidence: https://www.dropbox.com/s/8cbn8268ittz2ki/Screen%20Shot%202022-09-02%20at%208.10.13%20PM.png?dl=0 Copyright owners contacted Twitter DMCA portal and they refused to enforce the Takedown request making Twitter an instant Contributory Infringer.Public confusion over the Zelle application misuse of the copyright icon with that of the Copyright owner's own products and services. Copyright owner seeks immediate takedown of the infringing post and disablement of the infringing user's entire account until resolution. Copyright owner seeks the full remedy of $30,000 in damages if Twitter refuses to comply.ClosedWilliam GrecianoneTwitter, IncOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0141infringementTrue Life Story of Dr. Dippold growing up in foster care. Melissa Mulhollan is the editor on the project and her name is listed on the cover.TikTok Melissa Mulhollan has a private TiKTOK acount with 10 videos playing videos of me holding up the book that at the time was being published by PrinciplesLLC. Since July 1, 2022 ZeeT Publishing obtained exclusive publication rights for the said book. Melissa Mulhollan was notified in writing about the change in publisher and notified and requested multiple times to remove 10 TikToK videos advertising the book and Dr. Dippold as being published by her company Pfrinciples LLC. To date she has blocked Dr. Dippold from the account so she can not see that they are still up and being advertised. This in itself is 10 accounts of copyright infringement. This is deliberate wrongful acts on her part. MelissaMulhollan.com On her personal website she has a section called Just Another Slice ( Again she was notified that she is NOT allowed to advertise or market the book in any manner.) She has a picture of the book and an entire message defaming Dr. Dippold on her personal site claiming she is co-author. Melissa Thompsom Mulhollan Facebook She has a picture of the book on this site telling people not to buy the version under ZeeT Publishing. Again defaming Dr. Dippold. We have picI am seeking the max claim of 30,000. Melissa Mulhollan has three facebook post going asking people not to by the book from Amazon that list ZeeT Publishing as the publisher. We have a copy of a conversation where one person stated that she was going to by the book but Melissa Mulhollan told them not to. We have pictures of Melissa Mulhollan engaging in 41 conversations misrepresenting herself and not clarifying for people that she is not the copyright holder. Plus she is encouraging people to share the post. This is deliberate and wrongful behavior. One of her friends made a false review on Amazon with a 1 star rating stating that the book was fraudelent published by Zeet and the "editor is the author too." This lowered the ranking on Amazon impacting the sales. All of Melissa's infringements are not by accident and are on purpose wrongful doing. If there are any attorney fee's I am requesting the CCB board to consider her being responsible for those fees. Due to the defaming comments, her public claims calling me an abuser (I have a picture of the post), her claims I stole the book ( I have a picture of the post) it is not only affecting my author credibility but I am a psychClosedZeet Publishing LLCnoneMelissa MulhollanReissue Order Dismissing Claim Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0140infringementNight-time photo of Broadway in Downtown Nashville, TN (IMG Nashville-Classics-Downtown-Broadway-0481.jpg)Respondent saved and uploaded a screenshot of the copyright image from Claimants website. Respondent posted this image to referenced online locations to advertise and promote a commercial event. Infringement was found after event was completed and usage of copyright image had benefited Respondents business venture. Attempted contact with Respondent on September 28, 2020 via an attorney without settlement success. Documentation supporting is attached to case submission.Seeking monetary relief in the amount of $2,500 for the infringement made by the Respondent by advertising with and use of copied imagery by Claimant resulting in ticket event sales and profits of an unknown amount. Claimant works and relies on income as a freelance commercial photographer. The unapproved usage of imagery creates a burden on the Claimant in the following ways: 1) Reduction of passive income through online SEO-driven advertising. Originating website makes income based on advertising. Advertising revenue is dependent on active traffic. The active traffic is reduced when original imagery is duplicated, as SEO engines calculate this into originality of content and results in lower traffic direction to the original single-source posting. ; 2) Direct licensing fee loss. The cost of licensing the imagery was bypassed blatantly (by capturing the image as a screenshot. ; 3) An established business operating commercial for-profit events for years, PEM, the Respondent, infringed upon the Claimants copyright in a direct manner to boost sales and extend their profit for the promoted event. As such established business, the Respondent would be aware of the harm and legality of tClosedSouthern Fatty Media, LLCnonePremier Event Management LLC, Attn: Bill Burke22-CCB-0140 Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0139infringement2-D artwork depicting the history of American house stylesThe infringing party has been selling a duplicate of our copyright work on Etsy.com. When we submitted a DMCA takedown request, the infringing party filed a counter notice.We have lost revenue to this infringing party when customers purchased their counterfeit version instead of ours. It has also diluted our brand's value as having numerous sellers purporting to own our designs makes our work appear to not be our original work.ClosedPop Chart Lab, Inc.noneSione TuaiOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0138infringementPhotographPacific Tax Pros copied and posted Mr. Pearson's copyrighted photograph to its commercial website and Instagram feed without proper license or permission from Mr. Pearson.Mr. Pearson is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Pearson charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Pacific Tax Pros failed to properly license Mr. Pearson's copyrighted photograph.ClosedDavid C DealThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Pacific Tax ProsOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0137infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant Urbanlip.com LTD is a London based imaging company specializing in health and beauty images. Respondent is the owner and operator of the website https://faviana.com which is a website that promotes and sells the Respondent’s clothing and products . On or about August 2020, Claimant discovered that their photograph was being displayed on Respondent's website in an blog post designed to push traffic to the Respondent’s website and promote it’s business.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.CertifiedUrbanlip.com LtdThe Law Firm of Higbee and AssociatesFaviana International IncOrder for Claimant to Pay Second Filing Fee and For All Parties to Register for eCCB
22-CCB-0136infringementPhotographVisionary Financial copied and posted Mr. Verch's copyrighted photographs to its commercial website without proper license or permission from Mr. Verch. Mr. Verch makes the images available for use under a Creative Commons 2.0 license, but Visionary Financial followed none of the published terms.Mr. Verch is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Verch charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Visionary Financial failed to properly license two of Mr. Verch's copyrighted photographs.ClosedMarco C VerchThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Visionary Financial LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0135infringementPhotographDiscount Fence copied and posted Mr. Beeman's copyrighted photograph to its commercial website without proper license or permission from Mr. Beeman.Mr. Beeman is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Beeman charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Discount Fence failed to properly license Mr. Beeman's copyrighted photograph. Mr. Beeman timely registered his image and is therefore eligible for statutory damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504-5.ClosedJosh C BeemanThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Discount Fence Supply, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0134infringementPhotographAlpine SB Solutions copied and posted Mr. Buisse's copyrighted photograph to its commercial website without proper license or permission from Mr. Buisse.Mr. Buisse is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Buisse charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Alpine SB Solutions failed to properly license Mr. Buisse's copyrighted photograph.ClosedAlex C BuisseThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Jessica GranishOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0133infringementSound Recording, Production, Musical ArrangementSome contract was signed for the subject song. Song was released without a record contract and the SR was stolen from the claimant. Relief requested return of the copyright return of the SR recordings and full damages for $30,000.A contract was signed for the subject song. But the Song was released without a record contract and the SR was stolen from the claimant. Song was represented by a demo not intended for public release and stolen from the claimant and released without the claimants knowledge and without a record contract with the claimant for the group the global Gonks. This release was not discovered until two months ago. Claimant possesses an example of that recording for review by the board. The song represents a once a year special situation for military veterans and could have made the claimant well in excess of $30,000 for this song which represents Veterans Day had it not been stolen by the defendants. Relief requested return of the copyright return of the SR recordings and full damages for $30,000.Awaiting amendment/certificationLeslie M FradkinnoneSpirit Music GroupAmended Claim
22-CCB-0132infringementPhotographMartin Fein Interests copied and posted Mr. Lee's copyrighted photograph to a video advertising real property. Martin Fein Interests posted Mr. Lee's photograph in a video posted to its Facebook feed, and did so without proper license or permission from Mr. Lee.Mr. Lee is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Lee charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Martin Fein Interests failed to properly license Mr. Lee's copyrighted photograph.ClosedJerome LeeThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Martin Fein Interests Ltd. d/b/a The Belmont Luxury Apartment HomesOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0131infringementPhotographVan Valen Associates copied and posted Mr. Iwasaki's copyrighted photograph to its social media (Facebook) feed without proper license or permission from Mr. Iwasaki.Mr. Iwasaki is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Iwasaki charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Van Valen Associates failed to properly license Mr. Iwasaki's copyrighted photograph.ClosedRich IwasakiThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Van Valen Associates, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0130infringementPhotographBaroque Travel copied and posted Mr. Havel's copyrighted photograph to its social media (Facebook, Instagram) without proper license or permission from Mr. Havel.Mr. Havel is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Havel charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Baroque Travel failed to properly license twelve of Mr. Havel's copyrighted photographs. Mr. Havel timely registered his image and is therefore eligible for statutory damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504-5.ClosedTomáš HavelThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Baroque Travel, LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0129infringementPhotographVersatile Office Trailers copied and posted Mr. Jenkins' copyrighted photograph to its commercial website without proper license or permission from Mr. Jenkins.Mr. Jenkins is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Jenkins charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Versatile Office Trailers failed to properly license Mr. Jenkins' copyrighted photograph.ClosedArno JenkinsThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Versatile Office TrailorsOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0128infringementPhotographSt. James Chamber of Commerce copied and posted Mr. Moore's' copyrighted photographs to its commercial website without proper license or permission from Mr. Moore.Mr. Moore is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Moore charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. St. James Chamber of Commerce failed to properly license Mr. Moore's copyrighted photograph. Mr. Moore is due the cost of a proper license for the images at issue.ClosedPaul MooreThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.St. James Chamber of CommerceOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0127infringementPhotographAir Charter Advisors copied and posted Mr. Kruglov's copyrighted photographs to its commercial website without proper license or permission from Mr. Kruglov. Mr. Kruglov makes the images available for use under a Creative Commons 2.0 license, but Air Charter Advisors followed none of the published terms.Mr. Kruglov is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Kruglov charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Air Charter Advisors failed to properly license twelve of Mr. Kruglov's copyrighted photographs. Mr. Kruglov is due the cost of a proper license for the images at issue.ClosedRoman KruglovThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Air Charters Advisors, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0126infringementEssay on arts, general reflections on art with a focus on photoshop artist Tigran TsitoghdzyanThe domain www.ttigran.com is under Tigran T. control for commercial and advertising purposes. See attached Exhibits proving the fact. The author gave permission for a one-time printing of the text as part of a catalog, printed in paper, in the past, in the form a book, in 2015, but never granted unbounded permission of use of the text after that under any other form, and never for online publication, and even less gave the author the text for Tigran T. to copyright it. On his website the text bears at the end a note indicating that T.T. holds its copyright, which is utterly false. He has been taking advantage of the Plaintiff's work for his own improper enrichment. This infringement has been committed by him willfully, misleads the public, and it is a gross falsehood. See attached Exhibits proving the fact.The harm is financial, since the Defendant takes unbounded advantage of the Plaintiff's copyrighted work without proper permission. The harm is also public defamation, in the clear view that the Defendant, not happy enough by using the text online without permision to do so, has been exhibiting, since 2016, the next inscription next to it "Copyrighted Tigran Tsitoghdzyan", which is utterly false. This defames the author of the text, misleads the public, falsifies publicly the status of the literary work in an egregious, willful manner.ClosedArthur BaldernoneTigran TsitoghdzyanOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0125infringementPhotographOzy Media copied and posted Mr. Richert's copyrighted photographs to its commercial website without proper license or permission from Mr. Richert. Mr. Richert makes the images available for use under a Creative Commons 2.0 license, but Ozy Media followed none of the published terms.Mr. Richert is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Richert charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Ozy Media failed to properly license two of Mr. Richert's copyrighted photographs. Mr. Richert is due the cost of a proper license for the images at issue.ClosedMarcus RichertThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Ozy Media, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0124infringementPhotographsOzy Media copied and posted Mr. Proimos' copyrighted photographs to its commercial website without proper license or permission from Mr. Proimos. Mr. Proimos makes the images available for use under a Creative Commons 2.0 license, but Ozy Media followed none of the published terms.Mr. Proimos is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Proimos charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Ozy Media failed to properly license twelve of Mr. Proimos's copyrighted photographs. Mr. Proimos is due the cost of a proper license for the images at issue.ClosedAlex ProimosThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Ozy Media, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0123infringementPhotographs of car hood logosInside.com copied and posted without proper license or permission Mr. Radic's copyrighted photographs to its commercial website. Mr. Radic makes the images at issue in this case available under a Creative Commons 2.0 license, but Inside.com failed to follow any of the terms specified under the CC 2.0 license.Mr. Radic is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Radic charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Inside.com failed to properly license twelve of Mr. Radic's copyrighted photographs. Mr. Radic is due the cost of a proper license for the images at issue.ClosedIvan RadicThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Inside.com, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0122infringementPhotograph of subway trainEscape Quest LLC copied and posted Mr. Schumin's copyrighted photograph to its commercial website without proper license or permission. The infringing use of Mr. Schumin's copyrighted photograph appeared next to a description of the Washington, D.C. Metrorail.Mr. Schumin is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Schumin charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Escape Quest failed to properly license Mr. Schumin's copyrighted photograph. Mr. Schumin is due the cost of a proper license for the image at issue.ClosedBen SchuminThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Escape Quest, LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0121-DMCANANAAs a self-employed person - journalist and analyst on a freelance, my articles are my only source of income, and the specialty and uniqueness of my work help me to support myself. So, the use of my intellectual property (my articles) without my permission deprives me of my means of livelihood. Based on that, I kindly ask you to oblige the resource komentish.com and online service provider Google.com to remove my articles from the website komentish.com and Google search results.ClosedRuslan BarabanovnoneVitaly BogachevOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0120infringementOriginal Icon Design presented to infringer's representative for partnership on March 20, 2020Under section "How to Pay it Safe with Zelle", second (middle) image infringes the registered icon presented to infringer's representative on March 20, 2020Market confusion of competing service mark use of the copyright design. Copyright Owners seeks infringement relief up to the maximum Copyright Claims Board recovery of $30,000 for the single infringement count.ClosedWilliam GrecianoneEarly Warning Services LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0119infringementPhotographs of real propertyThe Pearsons copied and posted Mr. Pennell's copyrighted photographs to advertise and market a rental property listed on www.vrbo.com, without proper license or permission from Mr. Pennell, the copyright holder.Mr. Pennell is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Pennell charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. The Pearsons failed to properly license seven of Mr. Pennell's copyrighted photographs. Mr. Pennell is due the cost of a proper license for the images at issue, as well as attributable profits by The Pearsons. Since most if not all renters of vacation properties do so sight unseen and rely on photographs that accompany the rental listing, Mr. Pennell is due all profits from the period of time The Pearsons used Mr. Pennell's copyrighted photographs.ClosedJeffrey D. PennellThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Christopher S. PearsonOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0118infringementPhotographs of interior and exterior of houseCoastland Realty copied and posted Mr. Pennell's copyrighted photographs to its commercial website to advertise and promote the real property located at: 9100 Reed Dr, Emerald Isle, NC ("Queens Court 3101"), 7701 Ocean Drive East, Emerald Isle, NC ("Rooms With A View East"), and 7701 Ocean Drive West, Emerald Isle, NC ("Rooms With A View East").Mr. Pennell is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted photographs. Mr. Pennell charges license fees for the proper use of his copyrighted photographs. Coastland Realty failed to properly license seventy-nine of Mr. Pennell's copyrighted photographs. Mr. Pennell is due the cost of a proper license for the images at issue, as well as attributable profits by Coastland Realty. Since most if not all renters of vacation properties do so sight unseen and rely on photographs that accompany the rental listing, Mr. Pennell is due all profits from the period of time Coastland used Mr. Pennell's copyrighted photographs.ClosedJeffery D. PennellThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Coastland Realty, LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0117infringement-DMCAYou Said It Was Love Special Treatselling records and recouping royalties, and copyrighting music that was recorded in 1989.I originally had the song playing at the radio station in Houston on 102.1 we received no royalties from the song. I was unable to receive any information from Robert Gillerman. I received zero payment. I spent 25,000.00 to make the song in a studio in Houston in 1989. I would like to receive 25,000.00 and my master tape of the song back.ClosedRonald K DewittnoneSelect-O-HitsOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0116infringementPrivate Photograph I taken of myself in my Private Vehicle looking into the camera while holding my beard. I did not give permission or consent to use this pic in any way including in derivative worksHeels in the Air dba Vicki Pate has made a derivative of my Copyrighted work. It is not parody. It is not fair use. It is not being used for educational purposes. The Infringer has also infringed on at least 50 other photos / videos of mine that I plan to file claims against in the future. I've sent the Infringer Vicki Pate who Operates Heels in the Air a cease & desist. Vicki Pate has not complied as of this date.The Heels in the Air YouTube Channel that is ran by Vicki Pate has over 10,000 Subscribers at the time of this Claim. The channel distributing my Copyright Photo as a derivative of my work which is not fair use, it's not parody, it's not for educational purposes. The Infringer is using my copyrighted work to defame me causing deliberate infliction of emotional distress. I seek $20,000 in reliefClosedJonathan RichesnoneHeels in the Air dba Vicki PateOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0115infringementImage of a dog on a snowy hillRespondents accessed the watermarked photographs from Claimant's website, illicitly copied them, then published them to their commercial website to promote their rental property. When approached with a settlement offer, Respondents removed the website and later falsely asserted the website was non-commercial and the the use would fall under Fair Use or Claimant's free "personal use only" license (which it does not and which would still require Claimant's permission, see https://www.alex-kunz.com/about/photo-licensing-information/). Respondents refused to discuss settlement (see Statement of Facts, attached).Loss of license fees as well as control of Claimant's works. Claimant requests $12,500 in statutory damages for the timely-registered Landscape Photo and $5000 for the Dog Photo.ClosedAlexander KunzBurns the Attorney, Inc.Ryan TrenhaileOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0114infringementNone givenCopyright infringement in violation of United States copyright laws. Specifically, infringer is an IP attorney who chose to copy significant portions of Plaintiff's law firm webpage content describing its detailed step by step method for trademark prosecution. Please see cease and desist exhibit with side by side comparison.We are seeking the max in statutory damages. The infringer used Plaintiff's registered written content to compete for the same consumers and presented Plaintiff's work as its own to Plaintiff's detriment.ClosedGerben Perrott PLLCGerben Perrott, PLLCFine Point Law, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0113infringementManuscriptDorrance Publishing I ended with book contract with July 2018. Since then there has been numerous emails to them, to remove my book content for sales and distribution, including sending a complaint to the Better Business Bureau regarding copyright infringement and royalty payment issues. As of today, August 24th, my ebook of The Christian Teen Buzz, is still being illegally sold on Google Play and eBay websites for public display, reproduction of work and distribution sales. My book is copyrighted and should not be redistrubted or on display for sales or available for sales by Dorrance Publishing.The harm I have suffered is copyright infringement and my intellectual property being used against my permission, unreported book sales, and illegally profiting of my book, and missing and unreported royalty payments from 2018-2022. I would like monetary damages and undue stress damages paid to me to the fullest amount from Dorrance publishing and my book ebook ISBN #978-1-4809-7151-6 removed from Google Play, listed by Dorrance Publishing and the paperback removed from ebay, ISBN #978-1-4809-7151-6 immediately, back pay from any hidden profits unknown to me from Dorrance Publishing/Rosedog books.CertifiedShon S LewisnoneDorrance PublishingClaim Response
22-CCB-0112infringementMotion Picture Film for Coming to AmericaCopyright Rights: Paramount Pictures Corporation (“Paramount Pictures”) is the sole and exclusive owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the copyrights in the motion pictures entitled Coming to America and Coming 2 America (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Works”). The Works are original works of authorship, embodying copyrightable subject matter and subject to the full protection of the copyright laws of the United States. Paramount Pictures has complied with all requirements and formalities of the Copyright Act with respect to the Works. Paramount Pictures has obtained copyright registration certificates from the United States Copyright Office for each of the Works. Documents showing the registration of a representative sample of the Works are attached collectively as Exhibit 1 (See, e.g., U.S. Copyright Registration Numbers PA0000376420; PA0002280086). Background of the Works: Coming to America was a huge commercial success and the second highest-grossing movie of 1988, and remains immensely popular despite premiering over 30 years ago. See Exhibit 2 https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/1988/. Coming to America is an American romantic comeJMC misused Paramount Pictures’ intellectual property to deceive parents and children into believing that the Infringing Restaurant is affiliated with, or authorized by, Paramount Pictures. To make matters worse, the quality of the food is in serious question, as consumers have reported feeling discomfort after eating at the Infringing Restaurant. See Exhibit 25. The foregoing harm is irreparable and is exacerbated by the fact that in the Infringing Restaurants and in associated marketing materials, JMC has intentionally displayed and reproduced the copyrighted images, characters, costumes, and character names, and derivative works thereof, from the Works. JMC created, displayed, and reproduced the Infringing Materials willfully, and in knowing disregard of Paramount Pictures’ copyrights, of which JMC was on notice long before it began its infringing conduct. On information and belief, all of JMC’s conduct described herein has been and continues to be willful, wanton, and in bad faith, and none has been with the authorization or consent of Paramount Pictures. Federal Copyright Infringement (17 U.S.C. § 501) As stated above, the Works are original works of authCertifiedParamount Pictures CorporationKilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLPJMC POP UPS LLCRequest to Link David Caplan with the Paramount Pictures Corporation party
22-CCB-0111infringementLivestream debate with another Youtuber**SECTION I: BACKGROUND AND FACTS** I am a Youtuber and Twitch streamer who goes by the alias “Acerthorn.” My Youtube channel can be found at the url of www.youtube.com/c/acerthorn, and my Twitch channel can be found at the url of www.twitch.tv/acerthorn. On May 16, 2021, I did a live stream on Twitch, which I later transferred to Youtube, known as “Acerthorn's Credibility as a Reviewer (w/ Montyspa on Co-Commentary).” As of the time of this writing, this video can be found at the url of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDKSx4oi-r0. On January 17, 2022, I registered the copyright for this stream with the Copyright Office. Its copyright registration number is PA0002340792. At timestamp 2:17:55 – 2:18:23, you can see me giving a smug smile while I put my fingers together in a very smug manner. It is a long video, so to keep you from having to navigate to the timestamp manually, you can click on this link to take you to that timestamp directly: https://youtu.be/iDKSx4oi-r0?t=8275. There is a Youtube channel called “Acerthorn the True Acerthorn,” or ATTA for short, which is dedicated to harassing me, doxxing me, impersonating me (as evidenced by the channel's name), and inf$15,000 in statutory damages, both to compensate me for loss of licensing royalties, and also to teach Google a lesson about giving people the run-around after they file technically perfect DMCA Takedown Notices.ClosedDavid A StebbinsnoneGoogle LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0110infringementMedical DeviceWebsite sells my patented medical device without my consent, misleading people about treatment and endangering the health of patients. These devices should be sold only in medical institutions after consultation with a doctor.Damage is estimated at $5,000-20,000ClosedEckart KlobenonePectushealingOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0109infringementCompositionA)Title 17 Sec 501 B) Distribution and selling of copyrighted material C) I never was paid for a license.Loss of income I was never paid Lost sync licensing opportunities I want statutory damagesClosedLangston M ChildsnoneKOBALT MUSIC PUBLISHING AMERICA, INCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0108infringementBlack and white silver gelatin photograph of 4 elderly men in front of a store with "Sunglass Corner" written on the storefront window. This image was made in 1980.December 8, 2021 at 9:50 pm the respondent, Nathaniel Ladson sent a text message with an exact rendering of the copyrighted image "Sunglass Corner" attached, to a friend of mine and gallery owner for consideration in an upcoming exhibition. The text also included a picture of Nathaniel Ladson standing in front of "Sunglass Corner" (with his name on it) hung on a wall at a Georgianna's Joint in Manhattan, NY. He has also used "Sunglass Corner" as his cover image on Facebook.As a photographer for over 40 years, "Sunglass Corner" is my signature photographic piece. It is the image that I am known for and is easily recognizable as my work. "Sunglass Corner" helped to launch my career. It has been published and exhibited widely. I have collectors who have purchased limited editions, valued at $1500 each. Copying and reproducing "Sunglass Corner" in any way, reduces its value. My collectors bought and paid for the emotional sentiment evoked by this image- four elderly men from a different time standing as present day sentries to the Village of Harlem, New York. The high contrast and soft grainy texture is indicative of the style I've created, by using the same materials in processing and printing my images. Reproducing the image cheapens and devalues it tremendously. I've invested years, time and money honing my craft and skill as a self-taught photographer. This infringement has also threatened my reputation as a professional. I can't have the authenticity of my work questioned at this stage of my career. I have had my attorneys send letters to cease and desist all activities. They've also had phone conversations with Mr. Ladson, that resulted in hiCertifiedCheryl MillernoneNathaniel LadsonProof Of Service
22-CCB-0107-DMCANANAUnder the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, I am requesting that Jamie Park's post continues to be removed from the Google search results, as the post contains material that was taken from my original post that took an immense amount of time and effort to share to my audience. Moreover, submitting the original DMCA report as well as this follow-up report has been extremely time-consuming in an effort to showcase proper objective evidence, and has taken away from the time I could have spent on my business and has in turn affected my overall revenue. I believe all creative work should be protected under the Copyright Law to protect the author's integrity and the amount of hard work and effort dedicated to creating each original post.ClosedElle HongnoneJamie ParkOrder Granting Request to Link Jamie Park with the Jamie Park party
22-CCB-0106infringementMedical DeviceWebsite sells my patented medical device without my consent, misleading people about treatment, and endangering the health of patients. These devices should be sold only in medical institutions after consultation with a doctor.Damage is estimated at $5,000-20,000ClosedEckart KlobenoneIgor NaumovOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0105Not availableNANANot availableClosedSee captionNot availableSee captionOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0104infringementCompositionTITLE 17 US CODE SECTION 501 Willful Infringement Artist (Montana of 300) distributed and sold producer(LANGSTON M CHILDS) works with out written permission or a license. This violates producer(LANGSTON M CHILDS) exclusive and non exclusive rights to his works.Statutory damages. I also have had severe surgeries, I am handicapped and disabled. I want to be paid 15k-30k per work infringed.ClosedLangston M ChildsnoneWALTER A BRADFORDOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0103infringementThe Skunkman Comic Book Series Vol. VI with IllustrationsBreach of a Non-Disclosure Agreement. Paragraph 5, Misappropriation of Registered Copyrighted Material, Unlawful Acquisition, Misrepresentation, Passive UseEmotional and Mental Anguish, Misappropriation, Infringement of Registered Copyrighted Material, Misrepresentation, Attorney Fees, ExpensesClosedRichard KraynoneMatthew HeldermanOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0102infringement2-D Artwork (chart explaining the different types of beer)The infringing party has been selling a design that is plainly a copy of our copyrighted design.Our revenue has been hurt by customers choosing to purchase this cheaper, infringing product over our original design. We have sold our product for nearly a decade, and it is deeply associated with our brand. The infringing product is creating confusion in the marketplace because it looks so similar to ours that customers might believe it actually is Pop Chart Lab's product.ClosedPop Chart Lab, Inc.noneShenzhenshi Yijiangnan Dianzishangwu YouxiangongsiOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0101infringementArticle I published on a new paradigm I created for leader developmentOn his web site, Mr. Tobias plagiarized text from my copyrighted article. The following text was taken, almost word-for-word, from my article: The ALFA program begins with AU faculty working with the agency director to identify 1-3 difficult organizational challenges along with identifying an executive sponsor for each challenge. AU faculty then meet with each executive sponsor to assess the suitability of the problem for the Action Learning process; clarify the roles of the AU faculty, executive sponsor, and the team members; and provide guidance in selecting an effective Action Learning team. The executive sponsor for each challenge then selects Action Learning teams comprising 6-7 people each. Days 1-3:The first three days are classroom-based and focused on developing the leadership competencies necessary to utilize the Action Learning methodology. The class will focus on such skills as active listening, asking powerful questions, reflection, strategic thinking, and problem solving. Each team member is required to select one or more personal leadership developmental goals on which to work during the Action Learning process. Participants are challenged to let go of ingrIn 2009, as an independent consultant, I created this award-winning leadership development program, and have offered it ever since then, for a substantial fee, to individual and organizational clients all over the world. By copying my text, Mr. Tobias has made it impossible for me to market my program in Washington DC to Federal Government agencies. Agency clients will purchase Mr, Tobias's program rather than mine, since he has the imprimatur of American University, while I am an independent consultant without the ability to market as intensively as Mr. Tobias. I seek $30,000 in relief.ClosedRobert KramernoneRobert TobiasOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0100infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 241: Daniel Cormier vs. Stipe Miocic 2 mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on August 17, 2019 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents The Village Restaurant LLC, Brittany R. Havely, Joe Havely, Lorene A. Singleton, and Roger A. Singleton (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Indian Village Restaurant & Lounge located at 12 North J Street, Lakeview, OR 97630 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. RespondeClaimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisThe Village Restaurant LLC d/b/a Indian Village Restaurant & LoungeFirst Default Notice
22-CCB-0099infringementPhotograph of the exterior of St. Joseph Medical TowerRespondent illicitly copied the photograph (which appears under non-exclusive license on Mr. Durant's client's website), posted, and thereby distributed the photograph for its commercial purposes, i.e., to promote its business on its website. Despite demand letter, DMCA takedown required to effect removal of the work; respondent then replied to confirm removal but refused to discuss damages/settlement.Loss of license fee; loss of credit line/CMI Seeking $10,000 in statutory damages and any awardable attorney's fees for respondent's bad faith refusal to remove the work without a takedown notice and its refusal to negotiate pre-suit.ClosedJohn DurantBurns the Attorney, Inc.Soho Taco Gourmet Taco Catering LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0098infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramClaimant Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Claimant") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Claimant was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Ultimate Fighting Championship® 241: Daniel Cormier vs. Stipe Miocic 2 mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on August 17, 2019 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Claimant. Respondents Arif Skyline Café LLC and Hellen Abera Kassa (collectively the "Respondents") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Arif Skyline Café located at 3811 S. George Mason Drive, Suite C, Falls Church, VA 22041 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Respondent Hellen Abera Kassa is an individual who resides in Claimant seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Respondents’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Claimant’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisArif Skyline Cafe LLCSecond Default Notice
22-CCB-0097infringementA man posing with a guitar like hes shooting a gunmy photograph were used by a band for publicity purposes for their own profitI am the owner of the photos They were used to make profits for the band in the photos and other bands also on the venue bill , they were publicly shown in 2 newspapers , in ad flyers hung all over 2 Ohio Counties , it was broadcast on the Rock Radio Stations and ads all over Facebook . I am seeking the Maximum I can get in damages and I am seeking no further use of any of my photos again by this Man for his bandClosedCyndi WoftonnoneGary E MARKASKYOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0096Not availableNANANot availableClosedSee captionNot availableSee captionThe Copyright Claims Board dismissed this claim on November 8, 2022 because an amended claim was not filed in the time allowed. The Board finds that the Order to Show Cause filed on October 7, 2022, and extended on October 28, 2022, is now moot.
22-CCB-0095-DMCANANAAs a self-employed person - journalist and analyst on a freelance, my articles are my only source of income, and the specialty and uniqueness of my work help me to support myself. So, the use of my intellectual property (my articles) without my permission deprives me of my means of livelihood. Based on that, I kindly ask you to oblige the resource komentish.com and online service provider Google.com to remove my articles from the website komentish.com and Google search results.ClosedRuslan BarabanovnoneВиталий БогачевOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0094infringementThis is a video that I filmed of my dog and my best friend. I added audio and text and shared to my tiktok and Instagram pagesA massive media agency stole my content and is profiting of f it. They downloaded and removed my watermarks from a video that I created and shared on my own social media pages. I am a full-time content creator and make my living by selling content and by posting content. I get paid by social media platforms per like, view and share of my content. Additionally, I get paid in all future brand deals based on how many, followers, views and likes my profiles have. Doing Things Media, and their subsidiary Doggos Doing Things stole the video from my account, removed my watermarks, and shared it to their own account, amassing over 1.8 million views. They did not appropriately tag me nor ask my permission to use my content. I commented and messaged asking for appropriate credit, at the very least. My followers also began commenting on the post asking them to credit me. They deleted those comments. I then emailed them 2 times, once asking them to take the content down and twice with an invoice asking them to simply pay my content fee - the standard fee I charge for usage without watermarks or tagging. They are not only making money off my content but stealing my potential income As a result of this infringement and unlicensed use of Nicole Punzi's likeness, I have lost out on my standard fee of $2775 for limited content use - if a video is to be used in ads I charge an additional $1500 and if it will be used in perpetuity and additional $1000. Additionally, I have lost out on more than 1.8 million views which amounts to $720, or $.04 per view. The lost followers, likes, and views cannot be easily quantified because all of my future brand deals will now pay less as they have stolen those follows, likes, and views from me. Brands determine how much they will pay a partner based on engagement rate which is now marred because of these lost numbers. I am seeking my standard content fee of $2775, $1000 for use in perpetuity, $720 in lost creator fund fees, all fees associated with claim and subsequent case, and any damages amassed by them utilizing my content on their platform. I leave it to the Copyright Claims Board to determine any additional damages, but I would ask that you consider all of the aforementioned, as well as, the emotional damage, stress, and time that this issue has taken on me as an individual coming up against a multi-million dollar cClosedJennifer LeenoneDoing Things MediaOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0093infringementNone givenHorton Records or Brian Horton is distributing, reproducing, performing, displaying, etc., unpublished work with regard to the musical composition "Black Cherry." And in addition, a second musical composition published and titled, "Desiree."Horton Records is committing copyright infringement upon two compositions to which claimant is owner: "Black Cherry," and "Desiree." Section 106 of the Copyright Act of 1976 grants five exclusive rights to the copyright proprietor of a musical composition: (1) "to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;" (2) "to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;" (3) "to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public;" (4) "to perform the copyrighted work publicly;" (5) "to display the copyrighted work publicly." Horton Records is selling, reproducing, distributing, displaying, and performing an unpublished composition in which Claimant is owner, titled: "Black Cherry." Horton failed to give any notice to date. Horton paid no Licensing Fees, Royalties, nor Monies for any negotiated licenses, nor Compulsory licenses. Under Section 115, Horton had 30 days after the recording was made, to give notice of intent to use song. Royalty payments must be made "on or before the twentieth day of each month and shall include all royalties for the month next proceeding. Each monthly payment shall be made under oath..." 17USC app. sec 11CertifiedJames MarkhamnoneHorton Records, LTD.Second Notice sent on 2/9/23
22-CCB-0092Not availableNANANot availableClosedSee captionNot availableSee captionOrder Closing Case
22-CCB-0091infringementPhotograph of a senior woman jogging in a park wearing a pink sweat shirtThe image in question is used as a featured image on a commercial web page promoting the infringers business as well as featuring paid advertising.The claimants primary source of income is through the licensing of photographic imagery. This infringer used the claimants copyrighted imagery without permission, payment, or license, depriving the claimant of their primary source of income from works created for such purpose.ClosedDana HurseynoneNamita NayyarOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0090infringementA photograph of my blue acrylic pour paintingA photograph of my artwork was taken, a watermark of my name was removed, and the photo was used without my permission for commercial purposes by two companies over the course of at least two years. On December 18, 2019, I discovered that my photograph of one of my original acrylic paintings was being used as the primary advertising photo to sell “BYOB” acrylic pour painting classes at a New York-based company called “The Paint Place” through the website CourseHorse.com. They posted this photo in affiliation with multiple classes being held at least two different “The Paint Place” art studio locations in the New York City area throughout 2019 and 2020. According to posts of class listings on CourseHorse.com for “BYOB Panting: Paint Pouring” that had my photograph posted on them, these classes were being sold at a price of $60 per person, had an “average of twenty students” per class, and were often listed as being “sold out”. This photograph was of artwork that I created as part of an acrylic pour painting tutorial that I wrote and published exclusively on the arts & crafts website FeltMagnet.com on September 4th, 2018. How to Do a Pour Painting: A Tutorial for BeginCourseHorse.com and The Paint Place’s unauthorized commercial use of my photograph of my artwork that I’m using in current and future creative content and marketing not only reduces the value of my photo, but it implies a connection between myself and these companies that doesn’t exist. The many “BYOB Painting: Paint Pouring” art classes at two New York City art studios being sold on CourseHorse.com and/or The Paint Place for $60 per person with twenty student classes over the course of multiple years, using my photograph as the primary advertising image on their websites, generated revenue for one or both of these companies that I received no compensation for. Internet traffic to my painting tutorial article that includes this photograph has gone down in the last several years as search engines view a photo appearing on multiple websites as duplicate content and de-prioritize the site in search results, which reduces my earnings from this article. As a result of CourseHorse.com and The Paint Place’s usage of my photograph on their websites, this photo has circulated online and has been posted on at least two other unaffiliated websites that provided details about these clClosedCarolyn KelleynoneCourseHorseOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0089infringementproduct descriptionInfringers have copied our work to describe their products.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.Closedlead creation incnoneQiping LiuOrder Dismissing Claim Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0088infringementproduct descriptionThe linked text plagiarizes our workThe link violated our copyright and caused serious damage to our economic interests, and we demand compensation of $30,000.Closedlead creation incnoneAmazon.com, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0087infringementproduct descriptionplagiarized our workInfringed our intellectual property rights, we demand compensation of 5,000 US dollarsClosedlead creation incnonezhang xinchengOrder Dismissing Claim Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0086infringementBookMy book was published on October 9, 2018. The original contract stated that the contract was good for two years and that I had full creative control along with the rights. 6 months after the release date, an email was sent out to all authors advising that the company was closing down and that our files would be sent to us. Any accounts where our book was being sold would be transferred in our names. The files were never transferred and royalties have not been paid to date. Amazon, Barnes & Noble and Kindle have been selling my book on their sites and sending the money elsewhere. I'm assuming to Kenn Dunn.Since this is the second time that I've been taken advantage of by a publishing company, this situation took a toll on my mental health. The thought of someone else taking credit and making money off my work made me physically ill and caused severe depression. I was left in financial strains that affected my livelihood and was almost evicted. I've reached out to the online sites to have the files transferred and continue to get an automated response. I paid an estimated amount of $5,000 and have no idea how many books have been sold or the amount that is owed to me. I had to stop promoting my book and take down my websites. This situation also made me an open target to thieves trying to steal my intellectual property and plagiarizing my book on their IG and Facebook pages. I've made both local police and the FBI reports on the people I believe were doing this. I have not sent a takedown notice because I do not wish to have the book removed, I would rather have the account transferred under my name and royalties paid. If that is not an option and the book is taken down, I ask that I be compensated what's owed along with compensation to be able to recreate my dream elsewhere. 3 yearsCertifiedApril A PhillipsnoneAmazon Legal DepartmentWaiver of Service
22-CCB-0085infringementInstrumental Music RecordingThe respondents have used the core melodic and rhythmic theme of my song "Heart/the Beat" in their 2019 release of "Ilomilo." An expert's analysis is summarized in this excerpt: "... this researcher concludes that these similarities have not occurred by chance or by coincidence. Therefore, they must have occurred by design. Since Heart/The Beat is the earliest copyrighted recording of the two, it appears as if significant aspects of Mr. Brown's musical material and ideas, which also appear in ilomilo, have been appropriated by the creators of ilomilo without Mr. Brown's permission and have been incorporated into the recording of that song."The respondents' co-opting of my work without attribution has deprived my ability to capitalize on the work. Estimates of the responses earnings from this infringement are in excess of $1,000,000.00. I am asking for attribution and the maximum allowable fine within this venue.ClosedJarhid A BrownnoneBillie E EilishOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0084infringementMy own original music and lyrics all of which I wrote, composed, and recorded with my own voice and my piano.In 2003, according to product labeling, Hasbro, Inc., without my informed consent, virtually trademarked a reproduction of the fable genre, symbolism, and fictional characterization, not just the title, of my own original June 1971 Unity Wee Wisdom (page 35) poem, The Groovy Pig, into the fable character plastic figurine toy, Groovy Peppa, a model of the Hasbro, Inc. trademarked Peppa Pig figurine line of retail toy products. As a result, I see the toy as a reproduction of my poem in that such fable character figurine is an anthropomorphic pig dressed up like a typical housewife with a guitar to be a rock star, whereas my poetic fable depicts an anthropomorphic sheep as a good samaritan giving up fleece to an anthropomorphic pig on the phone like a typical shopper with the fleece as a wig to be somebody.I feel that I should be back-paid, present-paid, future-paid, and publicly acknowledged for my original contributions to successfully realized product developments because such negligence against me defames me, or prevents me from becoming famous, blocking me from any major financial successes in life. As a result, I am asking for my name to be added to the labels of all of the past, present, and future Hasbro, Inc. Groovy Peppa products and for me to collect all of my past, present, and future earnings for creating the Hasbro, Inc. entire Groovy Peppa product line in a negotiated royalty payment split between Hasbro, Inc. and myself.ClosedStephen M RichardsnoneHasbro, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0083infringementCompositionThe infringers willfully used my compositions without leasing or exclusive rights. The label and artist consistently distributed and sold compositions that I own the rights to over several platforms such as: Apple music, Spotify, VEVO, Youtube etc.I never was paid for my work. I had a severe spine surgery. I am disabled. I need to be paid for the damages.ClosedLangston M ChildsnoneEmpire Distribution INCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0082infringementPhotograph of MMA fighter Jimi Manuwa at event weigh-inClaimant created the Photograph at issue (“Photo”) on September 28, 2012. Claimant first published the Photo less than 24 hours later when he provided it, with others, to his original client (Vox Media) for its consideration (Vox did not choose to use the photograph). Claimant then licensed the Photo, non-exclusively, to Smuggling Duds on Oct. 1, 2012. Smuggling Duds added its logos (“Logos”) to the Photo, as permitted under its license, prior to its publication of the Photo. Smuggling Duds published the Photo with Logos on the Smuggling Duds website, at https://smugglingduds.com/blogs/news/at-the-ufc-weigh-ins-with-dan-the-outlaw-hardy-and-jimi-the-posterboy-manuwa, on October 2, 2012, under its license (it is still visible at that URL). The Photo, as it appears on the Smuggling Duds website, contains Claimant’s copyright management information metadata, including his name, address, and other contact information. On information and belief, the Photo with Logos had not appeared anywhere other than on the Smuggling Duds website prior to the infringement by Respondent. On information and belief, on or shortly before May 17, 2013, Respondent accessed the Smuggling Duds websiClaimant seeks maximum statutory damages ($15,000). Respondent's behavior in almost 11 months of negotiations demonstrated bad faith, forcing this filing; therefore, Claimant also seeks maximum attorney's fees.CertifiedMartin McNeilBurns the Attorney, Inc.Blackbelt TV, Inc.Claim Response
22-CCB-0081-DMCA-noninfringementNANAEveryday that the app isn't on Google Play, we lose at least $1,000 of business. If the app doesn't return to Google Play, that is a financial loss of over $150,000 invested to design, build and market the appClosedHiro LLCnoneDragvertising LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0080infringementPhotograph of wine bottleRespondent used subject images in online advertising without licensing or otherwise obtaining permission from Claimant.Statutory damages in the maximum permissible by law Respondent's profits attributable to the infringements Claimant's costs and attorney feesClosedAlan DeHerreraLaw Office of Eric RidleyG. K. Skaggs, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0079infringement-DMCA-Image of Michael Jordan mid-air, dunking basketballListing derivative products on EtsyMarket dilution, consumer confusion, direct damages as a result of infringing sales.ClosedGoatpix, LLCLaw Office of Eric RidleyRaul MateiOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0078infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant Helayne Seidman is a photojournalist based in New York. Claimant is the creator and sole rights holder to a photograph of Golden Krust CEO Lowell Hawthorne. Respondent is the owner and operator of the website www.goldentaxrelief.com which is a website that promotes the Respondent’s tax planning business. On or about February 2021, Claimant discovered that her photograph was being displayed on Respondent's website in an blog post designed to push traffic to the Respondent’s website and promote it’s business.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.ClosedHelayne SeidmanThe Law Firm of Higbee and AssociatesGolden Tax Relief LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0077infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant Christopher Sadowski is a photojournalist based in New Jersey and working primarily in New York City. Claimant is the creator and sole rights holder to a photograph of a food delivery worker delivering food on a bike in New York City. Respondent is the owner and operator of the website www.joltbike.com which is a website that promotes the Respondent’s electronic bike and scooter service. On or about November 2021, Claimant discovered that his photograph was being displayed on Respondent's website in an blog post designed to push traffic to the Respondent’s website and promote it’s business.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.ClosedChristopher SadowskiThe Law Firm of Higbee and AssociatesJoltbike LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0076infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant Steven Hirsch is a photojournalist based in New York City. Claimant is the creator and sole rights holder to a photograph of NYC graffiti artist Adam Cole and a photograph of Samantha Barbash, the real life inspiration for the 2019 film “Hustlers”. Respondent is the owner and operator of the website www.thesource.com which is a culture focused editorial website with extensive advertising. On information and belief, Respondent monetizes its website through paid advertising. On or about September 2021, Claimant discovered that two of his photographs were being displayed on Respondent's website, each in separate editorial articles. Claimant never licensed the photographs to Respondent or otherwise granted Respondent permission to use his photographs.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.ClosedSteven HirschThe Law Firm of Higbee and AssociatesSource Digital IncOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0075infringementPhotograph of apartment 9 at 212 E 29th StreetRespondents reproduced, displayed, and distributed unauthorized copies of Claimant’s Photographs to the websites streeteasy.com, zillow.com, trulia,com and hotpads.com. Respondents exploited Claimant’s Photographs to advertise property they own/manage for lease, and upon information and belief, leased the property utilizing only Claimant’s Photographs as sole advertising media. Respondents ignored a takedown demand from Claimant. Claimant had not granted Respondent any license or permission to reproduce, publicly display, or otherwise use the Photograph for any purpose.- $30,000 - Lost license fees/royalties - Disgorgement of Respondent’s profitsCertifiedBrian TotinnoneBRIGHTON MANAGEMENT GROUP LLCClaim Response
22-CCB-0074infringementGreeting CardThe respondent directly copied our design, as well as, a design from Note Card Cafe and then bundled them together and listed them for sale on Amazon under the ASIN:B08G8Y3SWP. I contact Amazon through their Brand Registry team and they removed the listing off the website. The respondent then disputed the claim and now Amazon require us to sue the respondent in order to prevent them from selling this product on Amazon.com.We are seeking to prevent the respondent from selling our copyrighted products in the U.S.A and compensation for the units they sold since the effective date on our copyright registration (01/26/2022).ClosedMarket On MainstreetnoneYek Cheong LauReissue Order Dismissing Claim Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0073infringementA 1969 musical recording which includes seven individual works/songs, including the Title "Trip Thru Hell Part 1, first published January 01,1978 in the United States ISWC T9275121829, Th author created music, music arrangement as well as lyricsRakeem Calief Myer, using the professional name “Roc Marciano” knowingly infringed on at least two of my fully copyrighted songs from my copyrighted 1969 album titled “Trip Thru Hell” and a 1995 CD release by Sundazed records with the same music and title. I not only wrote the music I recorded and produced the original album from which he created the derivatives from. The songs of mine that were used to create the derivatives were “Trip Thru Hell Part 1”, “I Shot the King” and possibly others yet to be discovered (Attachments 1,2,3) Mr. Myer created a minimum of five derivative works using my copyrighted music on at least two albums he titled “Marcberg” (9 versions including CDs) and “Reloaded” (8 versions including CDs). There are possibly others yet to be discovered. (Attachments 4,5) The main derivative works Mr. Myer created utilizing my music and that I have been able to locate thus far are… Thug’s Prayer Thug’s Prayer Pt. 2 I Shot the King I Shot the King (bonus cut) Thug’s Prayer Instrumental Attachment 6 is a listing of the derivatives Mr. Myer, or the other respondents involved in this claim registered with SoundExchange prior to my discovery of tI am seeking maximum statutory damages, the costs of this action and such other amounts as the Court deems proper and within the limit authorized by this Court. The respondents acts of infringement were not only willful, intentional, and purposeful, but also in complete disregard of and indifference to claimants’ rights. Accordingly, claimant is entitled to judgment in its favor and against each respondent, jointly and severally, for statutory damages, in the discretion of the Board. By failing to obtain Petitioner’s authorization to use the Copyrighted Work or to compensate Petitioner for their various uses, Respondents have avoided payment of license fees and other financial costs associated with obtaining permission to exploit the Copyrighted Work, as well as the restrictions that Petitioner is entitled to and would place on any such exploitation as conditions for Petitioner’s permission, including the right to deny permission altogether The Respondents have certainly gained an undeserved and unknown amount of revenue/profit from the derivatives by exploiting my original music. This has caused an immeasurable amount of damage, damaging credibility, sullied my originaClosedKenneth D ErwinnoneMass Appeal Records LLCOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0072infringementSong was used in the 2019 film “The Aftermath”Songs were expolited by synchronization usage in the film to enhance the value of the film without permisiion and or compensation to the author who wrote the lyrics to these songs.The clamant has suffered by usage of these songs without being duly compensated with royalties that are required for usage of the songs. As a result, the claimant is seeking $30,000 for the payment of royalties.CertifiedScott Douglas Ora, individually, and in his derivative capacity as trustee of the Leo Robin Trust, on behalf of the Leo Robin TrustnoneWarner Chappell MusicClaim Response
22-CCB-0071infringementTwo photographs of Riley Perez. One of Riley Perez on a jet with a woman. One of Riley Perez in a boxing ring.Representatives of TNT contacted Plaintiff asking him to be a part of their television series ( Rich & Shameless) as a subject and to allow for certain photographs to be licensed. Plaintiff declined TNT request for an interview but allowed for the use of the cover of his book (What Is Real? (Rare Bird Books, 2018)). Plaintiff denied the use of the copyrighted photographs that were requested. When the Rich & Shameless episode aired on 4/23/2022 on TNT and HBO Max, Plaintiff noticed that the TNT producers used his copyrighted work in their television show after having denied TNT a licensing right.Plaintiff is seeking statutory damages. The infringement happened on 4/23/2022 and Plaintiff filed for a copyright on 6/8/2022 (within the 3 month time frame of an infringement to qualify for statutory damages) the U.S.Copyright Office acknowledged receipt of Plaintiffs registration and on 7/3/2022 Plaintiff was granted a copyright. It is best for Plaintiff to seek statutory damages of $30,000 in this venue as it would be a laborious and costly legal fight to seek disgorment of profits of Respondents attributable to their infringement and to include the value of all gains, advantages, benefits of Respondents would exceed the $30,000 limit that this board is authorized to adjudicate.ClosedDarnell Riley-PereznoneTurner Broadcasting Sysytems, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0070infringementThe Joy of Juggling by Dave Finnigan doing business as Juggle Bug, Inc. - instructional juggling bookIn 2010 I signed an agreement with Greg Boehm, then the President of Mud Puddle Books, to be paid a small fee of 10 cents for every copy of my copyrighted book, "The Joy of juggling," which he wanted to sell in juggling kits that he intended to market. I received a payment in 2011 of $3,497, and in 2012 I got $935.40 and in 2013 $809.60, but then the payments stopped. However I saw the books in their Mud Puddle packaging in stores all over the country. So I called and e-mailed Greg repeatedly and asked for an accounting, but he stone-walled me, probably knowing it would be too expensive for me to hire an attorney to sue him. However you can see that they are still selling the book and the kit although they sometimes misspell my name to Finnegan on the cover. https://www.amazon.com/Joy-Juggling-Finnigan-Puddle-Books/dp/B00DJIVQNK https://www.amazon.com/Mud-Puddle-Books-Inc-Juggling/dp/1603110194 https://poshmark.com/listing/The-Joy-of-Juggling-Book-Kit-5f5a6b7f1801362f3099c7db Here is the latest correspondence with him where he acknowledges the issue and says he will be getting back to me, but he never has. On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 8:50 PM Oliver Finnigan I entered into an agreement in good faith and Greg Boehm fulfilled as agreed for a few years and then stopped. $5,000 is nowhere near the amount owed, but it would be sufficient. I would then like to either terminate the agreement or renew it with the new Mud Puddle owners, but with assurance I will get paid.ClosedOliver D Finnigan 3noneGreg BoehmOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0069infringementA snake in the shape of a uterusThis person has been warned multiple times that this is my copyright protected art. They refuse to take it down off their Etsy store even though I provided Etsy with the copyright registration number and reported it for copyright infringement.She is selling my art as a file, which is allowing others to create what they want and continue to sell my work without my permission. I am constantly doing take down notices because people are buying her file and selling their own products. I’m looking for the maximum of $30,000 in relief since she clearly refuses to stop stealing my art and causing me to work extremely hard to keep up with others selling my art. She has tried to sell it 4 different ways on Etsy to “beat the system” and continue to profit off of stolen art. I’ve tried to contact her personally many times but she ignores me, and Etsy won’t do anything unless I personally use my money to bring a lawsuit against her.ClosedAnne LesniaknoneLeah TuttleOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0068infringementIt is a compilation video of my original video and musical works with my interactions with higher dimensional craft, beings and energieThe Corridor Crew, without my permission illegally used tiny snippets of my compilation video to ridicule me and my work to an audience of over a million viewers to date. The video in question @ the 11 minute mark for 46 seconds: https://youtu.be/CVjC1wfovz0 They purposely ignored the nearly twenty minutes of compelling evidence presented in my video and further called me an idiot, that I would be pissing my pants and various other derogatory terms while quickly dismissing me and my work to potentially their five plus million subscribers. To date this video has over 1.16 million views in four months. My video that most of the story snippets were taken from: https://youtu.be/IvBboLBw-qc This compilation is the result of over ten years of dedicated work in this field. I have been on national television twice on CNN and the Travel Channel and am slated for a profile on the History Channel's The Proof Is Out There this fall. The reckless and vicious comments and cherry picking of tiny segments of my original work had been devastating to me personally and has caused grace damage to my name and my YouTube channel. I feel compensatory and punitive damages of $30,000The fact that over a million viewers have now seen my work, with my name and YouTube channel notated at the bottom of the first video clip from their hatchet work to my good name has caused and grave long term harm to me and me work. The fact that they chose to ignore all the other compelling evidence on the compilation video that they culled for their supposed debunking evidence is proof of ill will and malice towards me that was completely unprovoked from me. Indeed, I only just happened to find out what they had done while viewing various YouTube clips on the subject and recognized my work.ClosedJohn C MartinnoneCorridor Digital, LLC, dba. Corridor CrewOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0067infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramPlaintiff Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Plaintiff") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Plaintiff was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Manny Pacquiao vs. Keith Thurman boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on July 20, 2019 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Plaintiff. Defendants Fusion Groups, Inc., Maurntee Ttoe, and Cameron D. Williams (collectively the "Defendants") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Fusion Spice Bar located at 2801 Lancaster Avenue, Wilmington, DE 19805 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Defendants Maurntee Ttoe and Cameron D. Williams are individuals who reside in the State of Delaware and were membPlaintiff seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Defendants’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Plaintiff’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisFusion Groups, Inc.Second Default Notice
22-CCB-0066infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramPlaintiff Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Plaintiff") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Plaintiff was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Manny Pacquiao vs. Keith Thurman boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on July 20, 2019 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Plaintiff. Defendants Jesses Pizza LLC and Jose O. Hernandez (collectively the "Defendants") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Jesse’s Pizza located at 2997 Desert Street, Unit 4, Rosamond, CA 93560 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Defendant Jose O. Hernandez is an individual who resides in the State of California and was a member, manager, officer and/or principalPlaintiff seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Defendants’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Plaintiff’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.ClosedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisJesses Pizza LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0065infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramPlaintiff Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Plaintiff") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Plaintiff was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Manny Pacquiao vs. Keith Thurman boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on July 20, 2019 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Plaintiff. Defendants Cabo Tacos & Beer Inc., Mario M. Arce Jr., and Fernando Zarate Flores (collectively the "Defendants") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Cabo Wabo Grill located at 831 E. 8th Street, National City, CA 91950 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Defendants Mario M. Arce Jr. and Fernando Zarate Flores are individuals who reside in the State of CaliforPlaintiff seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Defendants’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Plaintiff’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisCabo Tacos & Beer Inc.Second Notice to Register for eCCB
22-CCB-0064infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramPlaintiff Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Plaintiff") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Plaintiff was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] the Manny Pacquiao vs. Keith Thurman boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on July 20, 2019 (the "Program") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Plaintiff. Defendants Dollar Hits Temple, Inc. and Elvira F. Chan (collectively the "Defendants") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Dollar Hits located at 2422 W. Temple Street, Los Angeles, CA 90026 (the “Establishment”) on the date of the Program. Defendant Elvira F. Chan is an individual who resides in the State of California and was a member, manager, officer and/or principal oPlaintiff seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $15,000.00 for the Defendants’ willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Plaintiff’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisDollar Hits Temple, Inc.Order Granting Request to Link Marlon B Baldomero with the Elvira F. Chan and Dollar Hits Temple, Inc. parties
22-CCB-0063infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramPlaintiff Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Plaintiff") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Plaintiff was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] to authorize the public exhibition of (1) the Manny Pacquiao vs. Keith Thurman boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on July 20, 2019 and (2) the UFC 240: Max Holloway vs. Frankie Edgar mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on July 27, 2019 (collectively the "Programs") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Program in their commercial business without authorization from Plaintiff. Defendants Tiki Sports Lounge and Grill LLC, Maria E. Arevalo, and Naomi R. Henson (collectively the "Defendants") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as Tiki Lounge located at 165 LPlaintiff seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $30,000.00 for the Defendants’ willful violations of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Plaintiff’s attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisTiki Sports Lounge and Grill LLCSecond Notice to Register for eCCB
22-CCB-0062infringementLive Sports Pay-Per-View ProgramPlaintiff Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. ("Plaintiff") is a Pennsylvania corporation that specializes in commercially licensing premier sporting events to commercial locations such as bars, restaurants, lounges, clubhouses and similar establishments. By written agreement, Plaintiff was granted the exclusive right to license, display, and distribute publicly [17 U.S.C. § 106(4) & (5)] to authorize the public exhibition of (1) the Manny Pacquiao vs. Keith Thurman boxing program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on July 20, 2019 and (2) the UFC 240: Max Holloway vs. Frankie Edgar mixed martial arts program, including all undercard bouts and commentary, on July 27, 2019 (collectively the "Programs") for businesses such as the business made the basis of this claim. Commercial businesses such as the business made the basis of this suit were not authorized to receive and exhibit the Programs in their commercial business without authorization from Plaintiff. Defendants Wolves Enterprise, LLC, Roberto F. Gonzalez, and Sal Vargas (collectively the "Defendants") owned, operated, maintained, and controlled the commercial business known as La Barrita Bar located at 546 Grand AvePlaintiff seeks statutory damages in the discretion of the Board, of up to the maximum amount of $30,000.00 for the Defendants' willful violations of 17 U.S.C. § 501 and for Plaintiff’s attorney's fees, interest, and costs of proceedings.CertifiedJoe Hand Promotions, Inc.Jekielek & JanisWolves Enterprise LLC d/b/a La Barrita BarFirst Default Notice
22-CCB-0061infringementhand painted and then digitally enhanced Red glitter Christmas Digital paperEtsy is continuously criminally culpable in allowing infringement to occur on their platform and are aware of are aware of it, Evidence was provided to three other platforms the Creativemarket, HungryJpg and CreativeFabrica, market places and after an investigation was completed they removed the offenders shop for posting pirated content and infringing material on their platform. Etsy refuses to remove the offender and offending content from their platform even after receiving numerous complaints of copyright infringement from various sellers for the offender, Etsy is allowing this shop owner to sell not only my copyrighted works but others as well. Ive contacted etsy over a dozen times to no avail and no response. Etsy then allowed this person to relist my content and retaliatory remove my shops content, and allowed the user to list myself my name and my address for sale as an item in her shop for $10 and as far as I know you cannot sell human beings. Etsy also allowed this person to defame my character and write 1 star reviews of my content claiming that it was poor or not my own. The extent of the harassment's forced me to close my shop and to have to close permaI suffered extreme mental and physical ailment due to the harassment and bullying, The stress and anxiety and the incredible amount of loss of sleep due to the strain of having my art stolen. I received a huge loss to my business and loss of sales due to etsys incredible reach and platform millions of people were able to view the defamatory listing and reviews and allowing another shop to sell my art has diluted my brand and destroyed my business.Closedcharlotte SalcedononeEtsyOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0060infringementCircular, diamond vector background displaying multiple shades of blue, with the alias "Acerthorn" overlaying it.There is a Twitch user who currently goes by the username jelmerve334. You can find his account by going to the URL of www.twitch.tv/jelmerv334. On or around March 20, 2022, I noticed that he was using my copyrighted Channel Icon #6 as his channel icon without my authorization, and so on March 20, 2022, I issued a DMCA takedown to Twitch asking for it to be taken down. However, Twitch did not take the infringement down. They replied to my DMCA Takedown Notice and asked that I provide proof that I actually own the copyright to this icon. This is not a valid request. 17 USC § 512(c)(3)(A)(i)-(vi) sets forth six things that a DMCA Takedown Notice must include. I included all six of these things and can easily provide proof thereof once this case gets underway. At no point does the DMCA require me to provide proof of copyright ownership when I issue a DMCA Takedown Notice. The law does not entitle the ISP to request additional details, other than those set forth in § 512(c)(3)(A)(i)-(vi), to verify an otherwise statutorily-compliant takedown notice. It was not until May 10, 2022 that it was finally taken down. This means that Twitch allowed the act of infringement to continueSee my section on "describe the infringement."ClosedDavid A StebbinsnoneTwitch Interactive, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0059infringementThe sound recording and underlying composition "Boxed-Up Memories" by Kerry Muzzey, copyright owned by Kirbyko Music LLC1) The sound recording and underlying composition "Boxed-Up Memories" were used as underscore in a motion picture posted to the "Online Cinema" YouTube channel. 2) I o/b/o Kirbyko Music LLC issued a takedown on the unlicensed music use via Content ID. 3) Mr. Chen filed a false counter-notification with YouTube, under penalty of perjury, in order to release the legitimate strike, which causes monetization on his YouTube channel to be turned off. This is a common tactic by ex-US YouTube streamers because they know that reaching them with litigation is nearly impossible. 4) I emailed Mr. Chen directly asking him to remove his false counter-notification. He has not replied. 5) per the DMCA I now have only a few days' time in which to file a suit against the false counter-notification. 6) I do not know the original date of infringement as I believe this film (created in China) has existed for some time, and now this YouTube channel has acquired the streaming rights to it. However, the underlying musical score - my work "Boxed-Up Memories" - is unlicensed and is the commercial copyright infringement at issue here. 6) Mr. Chen wrote the following to YouTube in order to expedite theI have lost a synchronization and master recording license fee, as well as performance royalties, for both the original creation and broadcast/streaming of this motion picture, as well as losing license fees for the subsequent streaming on YouTube. This is an unlicensed use of my copyrighted composition and sound recording. In addition to this loss, once Mr. Chen's false counter-notification is processed, the infringing content will go back online, where it will continue to be monetized by both Mr. Chen and YouTube, resulting in continuing loss of income by me, the owner of the work, and a continuing erosion of my rights under copyright law.ClosedKirbyko Music LLCnoneKevin ChenOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0058infringementsound recording embodying the following copyright controlled compositions by Michelle Shocked: 1. Five AM in Amsterdam 2. The Secret Admirer 3. The Incomplete Image 4. Who Cares Down on Thomas St. 5. Fogtown 6. Steppin Out 7. The Hep Cat 8. Necktie 9. (Don't You Mess Around with) My Little Sister 10. The Ballad of Patch Eye and Meg 11. The Secret to a Long Life (Is Knowing When It's Time to Go)unauthorized distribution of a counterfeit product on an online third-party marketplace, advertised as "used." The listing includes unlicensed distribution of claimant's registered copyright Works (11), unauthorized display of the copyright protected artwork, as well as unauthorized use of claimant's registered mark, "Michelle Shocked," as well as unauthorized use of claimant's registered mark as a search keyword.complete market failure due to devaluation of claimant's intellectual property rights and claimant's ability to exercise exclusive distribution and display rights.CertifiedMichelle ShockednoneJames BillingtonSecond Notice sent on 2/16/23
22-CCB-0057infringementPortrait of male with glassesThe infringer displayed this image on their website inferring that it was a portrait of a past client giving a testimonial.The claimants primary source of income is through the licensing of photographic imagery. This infringer used the claimants copyrighted imagery without permission, payment, or license, depriving the claimant of their primary source of income from works created for such purpose.ClosedDana HurseynoneDavid VignolaOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0056infringementPhotograph of Family having a picnicThe Image was used without authorization or license to advertise a product on the infringers website.The claimants primary source of income is through the licensing of photographic imagery. This infringer used the claimants copyrighted imagery without permission, payment, or license, depriving the claimant of their primary source of income from works created for such purpose.CertifiedDana HurseynoneLavaca LLCOrder Regarding Submission of Additional Information to Supplement Written Testimony
22-CCB-0055infringement-DMCA-noninfringementA novel about how Christians and sinners come together to seek out God for all their trials and tribulations.My manuscript entitled, "From the Greenleaf to Greener Pastures, somehow ended in the possession of the infringers, OwnTV Network, in which substantial and in certain parts, identical information from my manuscript was copied and used by the television network. It could have been the direct result of the publishers who had copyright access to my manuscript and sent to the copyright office in 2005. After I sent to the copyright office in 2003. The publishers was New Age World Publishing Inc.My artistic works have been shown in the TV series, entitled "Greenleaf", in which I am still seeking punitive and statutory damages for the use of my work, which has apparently been out on the black market due to my work not being fully protected by the US Copyright Office.ClosedFreda J DaynoneDayOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0054infringementMind maps for students to learn content to take exams.The owner of the website is selling pirate copies of my product without my consent and ilegally using my brand's name without autorization for his own benefit, harming my business. My original work is sold only on my website: https://mapasdalulu.com.br/ and I also advertise it through Instagram at https://www.instagram.com/mapasdalulu/.Through ilegally selling my products at less than 10% of the original price, the owner of the website is harming my business as well as committing a crime here in Brazil. I claim that the page containing my produt is taken down and he is prevented from putting it up again.ClosedMapas da Lulu Comercio de Ebooks LtdanonePirata DigitalOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0053infringementBook of Narrative NonfictionThe scrip writers used many scenes drawn from my book, Recounting the Anthrax Attacks. They used the timing and interpretation of scenes as interpreted by me.The respondents produced a derivative work, an TV mini-series, based on my which was under option by an independent producer at the time. The respondents refuse to provide any royalties or monetary compensation.CertifiedScott DeckernoneKelly SoudersOrder Granting Request to Link Monica Pa Moye with the Brian Peterson and Kelly Souders parties
22-CCB-0052infringementMr Shellenberger and his wife sitting on couchMr Shellenberger has used my copyrighted works on his business and political websites without copyright notice/credit. He has also used my images on his social media pages without copyright notice/credit. He has altered the images, distributed the images freely from his website, and used them for campaign ads (commercial use). His license to use these images expired in 2/2020 but he continued to use the images without requesting an extension of the license. When I reached out to Mr Shellenberger to request that he renew the license he refused. He has ignored my requests to remove the images and continues to offer them as downloads from his website. At least one of my images was being used to make t-shirts for Mr Shellenberger's campaign.The majority of my work comes from referrals both direct and indirect. By not crediting me with use of the images, Mr Shellenberger is denying me a potentially wide audience of prospective clients. He also has been using my images without paying licensing fees for nearly 2.5 years. I am seeking statutory damages.ClosedGabriel HarbernoneMichael ShellenbergerOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0051infringementI'm from Malaysia. Copyright need not be registered (https://www.kass.com.my/copyright/#:~:text=Unlike%20trademarks%2C%20designs%20and,creator%20of%20the%20work%20automatically.) The nature of my work is a fiction (shifter romance) novel that has been broken up into 199 chapters on the infringing sites. I've only licensed this work to certain pay-to-read platforms, namely GoodNovel, iReader, MoboReader, NovelCat, Popink, Noveltells, VolcanoEbook, and FishNovel, all of which are companies, not individuals. And these authorized companies charge a fee to readers for access to the material in question. The respondents and I did not sign any contract. Both respondents are not authorized to use my work.The infringing sites have taken my book that I've licensed to other platforms and put it in public for free. Once a person types the title of my book and add the word "free", the respondents' sites become visible. The download steps are easy and they are all pdf documents.Due to the fact that they'd been circulating my book for free, my income significantly dropped until I filed a DMCA with Google. They issued a counter notification, stating that they belong to a group where they have access to such material. I'm copying and pasting their allegation here: Respondent 1: "I am authorised to use the materials on this addresses as the materials published are available for public use and distribution in Chinese language. We translated these copies to English for our audience" Respondent 2: "I am not the owner, but I am authorized to use the content" "Hello, This item wasn't lifted from the quoted website, rather it's a material that's accessible in the public domain (although must use a translator to access it fully). We belong to a group where we have access to these materials to use, share, read, etc." My book was NEVER translated. It was and still is only in English. I would know if my book was available in a different language. And it's a lie that the second respondent is authorize to use the material. I didn't and still don't authorize his use. Relief sought: court order to compel the removal of infringing material.ClosedChristina WongnoneEbenezer ObasiOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0050infringement2D fairy wing designMy photos of my fairy wings creations were used without permission and reproduced as stickers in a booklet that SHEIN is selling on their website. A friend recognized one of them and messaged me to ask if it was my photo, and indeed it was my photo from my Titania Painted Fairy Wings Etsy listing, the copper / rose gold colored one as seen here: https://www.etsy.com/listing/171521829/titania-iridescent-fairy-wings-with?show_sold_out_detail=1&ref=nla_listing_details. She sent me the listing (1st url provided above in previous section) and there I could see small thumbnail photos, of my Titania wings and also my green painted Teasel Fairy Wings. I'll call that one Sticker Book A. The photo of my Teasel Fairy Wings design can be seen in my old Etsy listing here: https://www.etsy.com/listing/60733733/teasel-iridescent-fairy-wings-with They're selling those sticker booklets containing my Titania and Teasel fairy wing photos for $2, described as '50pcs Scenery Pattern Random Material Paper'. So far it has 1773 customer reviews, indicating at least that many purchases. I then found another sticker book listing containing the same Teasel Fairy Wings photo that is in the firsI am the only company that sells these fairy wings designs in any format, and did not license SHEIN to sell these images. SHEIN is profiting off of my IPs without permission or payment to me, which deprives me of potential licensing income from my own IP. The sales of my images as cheap stickers dilutes their value, and when in addition they're displaying models wearing knock-offs of those designs, it implies to the public that I am collaborating with their company somehow when I am absolutely not. In fact, I would not choose to work with this company as the entire economy of 'fast fashion' and the negative impact it has on the environment conflicts with my values. I am seeking the maximum amount of damages that the CCB deems I should be awarded, should they decide in my favor.ClosedAngela M JarmannoneSHEIN Distribution CorporationOrder Dismissing Claim Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0049infringement-DMCA-Sound recording from a anime..RZA disappeared with the masters.We recorded two songs at 47th and 7th Street in Manhattan. RZA said we was going make 5,000 a song. He ended up disappearing with those songs, released them and my family died. Oliver Grant said he had this big meeting. I guess with the CIA or FbiCat 6 equipment damaged my vocal s and blocked my broadcast. We are currently getting a MRI soon but we are damaged.ClosedDanny A Valentine ShabazznoneRobert DiggsOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0048infringement-DMCA-Forever I Love America is recorded material for the Forever I love America OTT network and communications firm that signed Courtney Salter aka Ari LennoxWe working on our products and production and walked to the store. We ran into Brian Jones, a affiliation of Naheem Bowens and Andy Hilfiger. We spoke about the show he was filming and I told him we had a similar show. He said the girl name is Ari and the show is called Impact. I said we have sound recordings and a show called Forever I Love America with Ari. We spoke about 55 million. He introduced me to Gennifer Garner, a exec at eone. We spoke and exchanged numbers. We did a DNA test and than we kept having issues. A contract was pushed in front of me and we thought it was a clearance, not a deal. We also were induced from the Covid 19 test which we passed. It made us dizzy. Me and Gennifer spoke via text a few times to work this out and she stop responding. Brian called me a terrorist.Shut down of Sovereign Sweets and Eone. Mental harm and physical harm due to no pay and no products.Closed47th and 7th LLCnoneEntertainment OneOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0047infringementArtwork of cartoon character headshots drawings drawn by me. This work is not allowed for reproduction and the creation of product by unauthorized users.Reproduction of artwork and distribution in the form of charms with no authorization. They are publicly displaying it on their Etsy and Ebay page without permission.Profiting off of my artwork copyright property. I wish for them to cease the selling and distribution of my artwork.ClosedCathy PhamnoneMark O HarrisOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0046infringementPhotographic imageClaimant Mary Oakes is a professional portrait photographer. Claimant is the author and sole rights holder to one photograph ("Abby Image") and one marketing flyer ("Michalea Ad Image"). In late 2021, Claimant discovered that the Abby Image had been incorporated into a number of marketing materials for Respondent Heart of Gold and posted to its website www,usaheartofgold.com. Claimant also discovered that her Michalea Ad Image had been incorporated into a video posted on the Heart of Gold Facebook page, and on a video uploaded to the Youtube Channel operated by Respondent Heart of Gold. Claimant also discovered that her Michalea Ad Image had been incorporated into marketing materials for Respondent Heart of Gold and uploaded to the Facebook page for Respondent Jameson. Claimant did not grant a license or permission to use her works in this manner. Claimant is informed and believes that Respondent Jameson is responsible for creating and uploading the infringing materials. Claimant, through counsel, attempted to resolve the matter prior to filing this claim. Respondent Jameson email Claimaint directly and stated that she had a "team of attorneys" waiting to represent Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is largerCertifiedOaksHigbee & AssociatesHeart of Gold Pageant System Inc.First Default Notice
22-CCB-0045infringementaerial photograph of buildingDisplay of infringed work on websiteStatutory damagesActive; transferred to CCBDavid G OppenheimerL/O Lawrence G TownseneDouglas A PruttonFinal Determination
22-CCB-0044infringementLive TV broadcast of Sky Sports channel.They are showing Sky Sports live broadcast through their mobile applications on Google Play Store without the permission of our client Sky Group.We just need to protect the copyrighted work of our client.ClosedCopyrights ProtectionnoneHA Sports StudioOrder Denying Request to Link Haris Ahmed with the HA Sports Studio party
22-CCB-0043infringementmusical composition, words and musicnon-compliant compulsory mechanical streaming licensemarket failure of my own self-distribution efforts due to willful infringement that encouraged other distributors to engage in similar activityClosedMichelle ShockednoneTunecore, IncOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0042infringementMotion PictureOn May 1, 2021 and possibly at other times and dates otherwise, Respondent reproduced, transmitted, and showed to Respondent's subscribers Claimant's Oscar-shortlisted, duly-registered, motion picture without obtaining permission from Claimant or paying for a license.On May 1, 2021, Respondent showed its subscribers for profit the Claimant's duly registered copyrighted motion picture (which had been short-listed for an Oscar), and for which licenses could cost $7500 per showing or more without obtaining permission from Claimant.ClosedMyfilms (dba Mayfilms)Law Office of Julian LowenfeldMatvil, Inc. d/b/a etv.netOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0041infringementDocumentaryOn Thursday September 30th I, John Davis, CEO of RealToonTv Productions & Entertainment LLC gave Larry Smiley- El also known by the alias “Siyf Smiley,” the files to my documentary, MurdaWorth “The Story of How Gangs came to Texas” (which contains my image, likeness, and copyrighted intellectual property) in order to clean the sound, which he told me was his speciality after I had interviewed him. On October 7th I was informed that Larry Smiley was finished editing the files and was subsequently paid for the services rendered; However I never received my files. Some time after that Siyf quit returning my calls. On October 7th I sent Brian Hall a copy of the rough draft that syfe had completed, so that he knew what was going on with the project and for feed back. On October 11th Larry Smiley sent a request for permission to view a second project that I was working on through google drive; the only other person to have been given access to view the project was Brian Hall also known by the alias Bob MCGRIFF (Supreme). When questioned about the odd request Syfe came up with an elaborate story of how a hacker hacked his gmail account some time ago and sometimes sends emai3 Years of Hard work, thousands of dollars, chronic stress, and time wasted dealing with this.ClosedRealToonTV Productions & Entertainment LLCnoneLarry SmileyOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0040infringementStandard Character MarkGGL Projects, Inc. publishes Sitejabber.com a public website where its users can openly submit content. GGL Projects, Inc is buffered by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, this protection, however, does not give them latitude to use a competitors trademarked term to unfairly compete and be unjustly enriched. Sitejabber.com contains a webpage that uses Relevant Ads trademarked term: "Local Splash". Relevant Ads and GGL Projects, Inc. are business competitors that offer the same, or very similar, business services. GGL Projects, Inc. is using Relevant Ads' trademarked term in a matter that simultaneously damages Relevant Ads as well as enriches their Sitejabber property and which they profit from sales. Sitejabber.com is causing their webpage to be promoted and found by search engines, including Google and Bing, using the “Local Splash” trademarked term. Sitejabber.com sells a “paid plan” that is the same or very similar services that compete with the services that Relevant Ads provides its Local Splash customers.Relevant Ads suffers direct economic losses due to the tortious interference by GGL Projects. Relevant Ads existing and prospective online customers are illicitly drawn away to the Sitejabber.com website in which Sitejabber sells a competing offering. Relevant Ads Customer-X has been lured to Sitejabbers website through their promotion of the “Local Splash” term to search engines and, as a result, it has caused Customer-X to sever their services contract. Moreover, Customer-X has gone on to provide material benefit to GGL Projects, Inc. through usage of the Sitejabber.com website including purchasing the Sitejabber "paid plan". Sitejabber’s "paid plan" is a service that competes for the same, or very similar, service offer that Relevant Ads provides. Relevant Ads has a direct loss of revenue due to the severed agreement of Customer-X is $3,289 as well as damages to process the loss.ClosedRelevant Ads, Inc.noneGGL Projects, IncReissue Order Dismissing Claim Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0039infringement-DMCA-Forever I Love America is recorded material for the Forever I love America OTT network and communications firmChris Bruce and Yusef Ali recorded Forever I Love America on the U47 microphone in November of 2019. After Shyneika Taylor spent a whole night at the location working on a TMZ segment and Mitchell and Ness deal, Chris installed streaming and communications equipment with Why Fly Internet. Cameras were installed as well. After a argument ensued, Chris Bruce building manager Jamie Paglie admitted they used cat 6 equipment. He admitted harm to Danny vocal production and OTT network. We had to go through a series of legal proceedings to get out copyright filed to get him removed from the building. The building was not up to code and a NDA was breached with Chris Bruce name on it.30,000 dollars and the removal.of the equipment at 727 Market St. Wilmington De 19891. It's harm to my body and people have died since they breached the NDA.ClosedDanny Amen Valentine ShabazznoneChris BruceOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0038infringement7 inch vinyl recordJay Rowe used "Stop Sign's" musical composition to make his song "Side Stepping" without my permission with the feel of the groove which can be heard throughout the song.I am seeking compensation for using my music without getting permission and licensing to do so. Unauthorized use of my music is priceless at this time because it is ongoing everytime it's played on tv, radio, concerts and other musical outlets. We are seeking the maximum relief allowed.ClosedElton J White SrnoneJay RoweOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0037infringement2D artwork of fantasy characterThe Respondent sold Halloween masks and Halloween costumes based on the artwork. The Respondent was not licensed.The Claimant was not compensated for the the use of his original artwork. The Claimant requests all profits made by Respondent from the sale of the Halloween masks and costumes.ClosedThomas E WoodRay Wood, Attorney at LawSpirit Halloween Superstores LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0036infringementPhotograph of Actress/Model/Tv Host Cindy TaylorThe infringement involves a wholly unauthorized photo print of Cindy Taylor that was posted, publicly displayed, disturbuted and offered for sale on ebay.com as item 233857273682 by the infringer using the seller id 807miami.The harm was monetary and involves statutory damagesClosedBarry W RosennonePatricia A ClarenOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0035-DMCANANAAs a result of this, the content is not available to users attempting to reach it. Due to marketing and other outreach efforts which cost hundreds of dollars per month to send interested users to the content (via the website https://passportapp.io and directly to the Chrome Web Store, where it is unavailable), this is resulting in active monetary harm. The relief I seek is for the claim to be withdrawn, and for the respondent to cease filing takedown notices with false statements.Final Determination filedMichael FloresnoneMichael MitrakosFinal Determination
22-CCB-0034infringementNone givenHello Respected Team, We are legal partner of Sky Group (“Sky Sports”) to protect their intellectual property rights which includes the rights to broadcast live audio-visual coverage of various properties licensed to Sky Sports, for the entire world (“Licensed Properties”). Sky Sports holds broadcasting rights for Australia vs Sri Lanka T20 Cricket Matches (AUS vs SL T20). These rights includes, without limitation, the TV live broadcast rights, the TV highlights rights, mobile rights and internet rights for live, deferred, delayed broadcasts and highlights for all matches relating to the Licensed Properties on television and on the internet (“Exclusive Rights”). As an authorized agent we are entitled to enforce these rights which have been licensed to Sky Sports. The mobile applications being made available through the URLs below are making available footage from the Licensed Properties (“AUS vs SL T20”). To our knowledge, the developer's use of the footage in the mobile applications has not been licensed by the rights owner and therefore violates the Exclusive Rights granted to Sky Sports. Accordingly, we request that you remove the infringing mobile applications from google pUsers mislead Servers bandwidth used Brand with Logo usedClosedCopyright Brand Protection Pvt. LtdnoneHA Sports StudioOrder Denying Request to Link Arslan Ahmad with the Copyright Brand Protection Pvt. Ltd party
22-CCB-0033infringementA one-hour pilot for a fashion television seriesOn Friday, May 1, 2015, I answered an ad on Craigslist with the headline: “Narrative Script Needed ASAP.” The description said an experienced documentary producer was seeking a writer for an hour biography/documentary show. I sent a resume in response. (I worked at E! Entertainment Television on the non-fiction series “Celebrity Profile” and “True Hollywood Story,” and had written several award show red carpet scripts for TV Guide Network.) I heard back quickly from the producer, Tara Pirnia. She needed a short turnaround on a script for a show about the fashion evolution of Kate Middleton. When I quoted a price of $1000, she talked me into lowering it by half to $500, saying that it was the pilot for a series and she would pay me more for the next script. I agreed. She sent me a rough outline that included bullet points for each segment, divided up into nine blocks plus a cold open. After researching and writing the script, I submitted my first draft with my original title “Kate Middleton: Duchess of Style.” Tara praised my work in subsequent emails. She seemed pleased with my writing. I stayed in touch with Tara during the revision process, and she gave me additional noteI am entitled to damages because this was no accident. Tara Pirnia has practiced this kind of fraud and deception before. In documentation which I will attach I will demonstrate that she has a history of legal actions being brought against her to collect on rents, wages, and other monies that went unpaid due to her repeated deliberate actions meant to defraud others. Copies of these complaints are attached, as well as a list of all small claims cases brought against her. As recently as 2021, a complaint was filed by Amanda Raymond, the writer and director of a feature film Tara Pirnia produced. The cause of action was breach of contract. In the complaint the Amanda Raymond states that Tara Pirnia had no intention of paying the deferred compensation, contingent compensation or travel expenses as outlined in her contract. A copy of the complaint is attached. In my case, Tara Pirnia took one script I wrote and used it for two shows. She then resold these shows around the world in streaming and international distribution deals, including DVDs. While her career advanced into the area of directing feature films, with accompanying self=promoting interviews and red carpets, my contrClosedDan BartonnoneTara PirniaOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0032infringementThree Dimensional Jewelry CharmCopying and producing, advertising,distributing and selling my copyrighted designs, Selling my designs thru their website, in person sales at their business location, and offering for sale, copies of my original design at major trade shows throughout the USA.The infringer was afforded many opportunities to contact me thru online communication.A formal cease and desist letter and multiple DMCA take down notices were issued to their web host. The defendant is knowing of the infringement and willfully continuing to disregard the law. They have willfully failed to communicate and cease their copyright infringement. Copies of these designs have been found on Etsy and Amazon. My main source of income comes from sales on the Etsy platform. The financial harm caused by competing with unauthorized copies of my designs is one concern. Copies of my designs are being placed into brick and mortar establishments because the defendant is selling these designs through large, national trade shows. This distribution is allowing retailers to sell infringing goods throughout the world. Their actions are causing unknowing retailers to resell infringing goods and also leading them to copyright infringement claims. Because I voluntarily do not sell at a wholesale level, it has caused irreparable damage to the uniqueness of my designs. When a consumer sees unauthorized copies of my design in a retail establishment, the design is not considered to be an artistClosedROBERT SAPAnonePUKA CREATIONS LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0031infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant Steven Hirsch is a photojournalist based in New York City. Claimant is the creator and sole rights holder to two photographs of disgraced Columbia gynecologist, Robert Hadden, who was indicted for sexually assaulting his female patients for more than two decades. Respondent is the owner and operator of the website www.scdaily.com which is a Chinese-language editorial website. On information and belief, Respondent monetizes its website through paid advertising. On or about February 2020, Claimant discovered that two of his photographs were being displayed on Respondent's website in an editorial article. Claimant never licensed the photographs to Respondent or otherwise granted Respondent permission to use his photographs.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is larger.ClosedSteven HirschHigbee & AssociatesSouthern Chinese Daily News, LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0030-DMCANANAActual Damages and Profits: It is estimated by the use of Spotify streaming revenue calculators, in conjunction with information obtained via the spotify for artists website that the infringing party has taken roughly $40,000 in Spotify streaming royalties for Solfeggio Harmonics Vol.1 alone. Specific amounts prior to an injunction into the account’s records are not available, but could be much higher depending on the duration and degree of the offense. Royalties from Amazon, Pandora and other streaming services as well as digital downloads from iTunes and other digital download stores are only visible through the TuneCore account records. Statutory Damages: The infringing party has interfered with the publication, distribution and accounting mechanisms of Source Vibrations music by defrauding the account (TuneCore) under the email: fogleolina33@gmail.com. It's my belief that the infringing party altered the original account email, willfully falsified copyright ownership information within the TuneCore account and in statements made directly to TuneCore copyright agents in order to unscrupulously withdraw royalties. This has caused significant distress and financial hardship onClosedJason WildnoneDeborah A CalkinOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0029infringementOne (1) photograph from the Greenacre group registration depicting Paul Simon's Greenacre estate at night.In 2019, Claimant was commissioned by William Pitt and Sotheby’s to photograph Paul Simon's “Greenacre” estate under a limited, nonexclusive license for the sole purpose of Sotheby’s own advertising, on its own website and social media, of the listing for Greenacre, plus one limited use in the Wall Street Journal. Without permission, Respondent reproduced and publicly displayed at least one (1) of the Greenacre photographs (the “Photograph”) in the attached Ultimate Classic Rock article, dated April 29, 2019. Claimant never authorized Respondent to use the Photograph for any purpose whatsoever. In addition, Respondent falsely attributed the copyright in the Photograph to “William Pitt,” which is a violation of the DMCA Section 1202.$15,000 - Lost license fees/royalties - Disgorgement of Respondent’s profits - Omitted attribution induced, facilitated, and encouraged further downstream infringementClosedLane Coder Photography, LLCLeichtman Law PLLCTownsquare Media, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0028infringementNone givenRespondent produced, distributed and licensed Johnny Winter derivative recording of "Kiss Tomorrow Goodbye" in the 1984, 1991, 1992, 2011, 2016 and 2018 Johhny Winter "Guitar Slinger" CD, LP and DPD album(s), crediting Cervalin Music as the publisher. Additionally, the respondent reissued the derivative recording in the 2001 Johnny Winter "Deluxe Edition" CD and DPD albums, crediting the composition renewed on 12/26/1990 with the Copyright Office as RE0000558123 in the "Public Domain".$30,000 Statutory Damages False and misleading author information False and misleading publisher informationClosedChervalin Publishing CompanynoneAlligator RecordsOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0027infringementA LOVE SONGIn 1965, respondent John M. Hill brought the Claimant two Susan-Christie demonstration [dubs] “No One Can Hear You Cry” & *When Love Comes [I] knew, they were potential hits for my Chanté Record Label. *Forty years later they were included as the final two [Chanté-Soundtracks]***Paint A Lady Album*** had earned much critical praise (i.e. Industry Awards for New Albums) see: https://www.wikiwand.com> "They had earned much critical praise i.e. Industry Awards for New Albums.Claimant: Good Faith vs. Respondent: Bad Faith. As stated in the Wikiwand Post; "Columbia Records rejected the two Chante Soundtracks and granted a one-time-only-release, to Susan Christie, to find an independent recorded label for distribution. Mr. Hill knew that Chante Records had a P&D [deal] with Sam Hodge Sr. of Hodge Record Pressing [P] Co & [D] Distribution by Paramount Wholesale to Retail Stores of Philadelphia, Pa. Mr. Hill would not sign ownership of the listed agreements (mechanicals/soundtracks) with and to Mr. Alfieri until the Chante Records were pressed and ready for immediate distribution by May 21, 1965. In 2018, Mr. Alfieri's attorney notified Mr.Hill (voice & emails) of the infringements and offered a reasonable settlement of &600,00, for only attorney's fees with complete control over the signed agreements. At the first offer, Mr. Hill was inclined to settle; but, after two weeks, Hill [bad faith] through his attorney off Alfieri a flat fee of $400, and, rereleased full control of the copyrights back to Mr. Hill. Mr. Alfieri is seeking nothing less than the full, CCB amount of, $30,000 plus attorney's fees and full control of the copyrights Note: I will sClosedLOUIS D. ALFIERI SnoneJOHN M HILLOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0026infringementPhotograph is an image of a coastline with earth, water, and cloudsQuinn posted the photograph to Pinterest in support of her d/b/a, "Quinnspiration," which is dedicated to dispensing advice on: "health and wellness, self-esteem, life transitions, stress management, effective communication, and healthy relationship building."Mr. Graf is a commercial photographer who relies on the proper licensing of his copyrighted images. Mr. graf has a history of licensing his copyrighted images. Mr. Graf timely registered the image at issue in this case and is eligible for statutory damages.ClosedMark GrafThe Law Office of David C. Deal, P.L.C.Mary QuinnOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0025infringementGroup registration of photographsClaimant is a professional photographer. Claimant is the owner and sole rights holder to a real estate photograph. On or about April 2022, Claimant discovered his real estate photograph being displayed on multiple pages of Respondent's website with his permission. Between April 2022 and early June 2022, Claimant's attorneys corresponded with Respondent's legal representation regarding the infringement. However, as of June 4, 2022, Claimant's real estate photograph had still not been removed from Respondent's website. The parties were unable to reach a resolution and ceased communication on or about June 10, 2022, after which the photograph was apparently removed from the website.Claimant seeks an award of actual damages and disgorgement of all of Respondent’s profits attributable to the infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(i) and 17 U.S.C. §504(b) in an amount to be proven or, in the alternative, and at Claimant’s election, an award for statutory damages against Respondent in an amount up to $15,000 per work infringed pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1504(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I), whichever is largerClosedJohn NaschinskiHigbee & AssociatesCirca Group, LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0024infringementNone givenButter Lutz Interiors reproduced and publicly displayed the works on its website beginning in October 2013 without having first secured the permission of the author of the works to do so. The photographs were commissioned by publications such as Architectural Digest and Elle Decor; the author, Björn Wallander, is represented exclusively by Claimant, OTTO Archive, LLC, for the licensing of his photographs. Upon its discovery of the infringement in late 2021, Claimant conducted a thorough search of its records and consulted with the author, determining that permission had never been granted to Butter Lutz Interiors for its use of the works, nor had a license fee been paid by them.The harm suffered is a loss of licensing fees to which the author was entitled had Butter Lutz Interiors properly licensed the images via Claimant. The Claimant is seeking actual damages of $500.00 per image infringed for a total of $13,000.00.ClosedOTTO Archive LLCPeppercorn Partners LLCButter Lutz Interiors, LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0023infringement-DMCA-PhD's video interviewthe use the audio of my interview and these individual mixed with other materialThey are misleading my work, and making money for a confidential material. I also think that they intimidate me sending email to my other email. I think that they are the same people who send me death threats from another copyright claim.CertifiedCatalina M JaramillononeApple Inc.Notice of Compliance and Direction to Serve
22-CCB-0022infringementPicture of the Langley Covered Bridge from a drone.It has come to my attention that your company Green Line Media, LLC designed the website for Francoy’s Resort, L.L.C (hereafter “Francoy’s) under its website Francoysresort.com (hereafter “website”) have made unauthorized use of my copyrighted work entitled “Langley Covered Bridge from above (hereafter the “Work”) (Exhibit 1). I have reserved all rights in the Work, which was first published on September 13, 2016. I have registered the image with US Copyright office. (Exhibit 2) I uploaded this work to Wikimedia Commons under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International License (hereafter “Share Alike License”). , Under this license I allow anyone to use my work provided two conditions are met: 1. “Attribution: You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any what that suggests the licensor (myself) endorse you or your use. 2. Share Alike-If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.” Francoy’s website for 30 Things to do in Southwest Michigan, number 22: Visit the CoveThe loss of control of my most popular image, loss of licensing fees. Loss of tracking of use, loss of marking, loss of future income.ClosedJoshua S GoodrichLighthouse Litigation PLLCGreen Line MediaOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0021infringement-DMCA-It was a video interview for my PhDThese individuals has taken and alter parts of my work and they had even made a photomontage imitate me and ridicule me. They had used my material to intimidate me and I even received death threatsThe individuals who published the material claimed my work with fake notification. They send me death threats that they will kill me if I keep claiming my work. I send all these documents to YouTube and Google. I even open a case of data protection in Ireland. The individuals who published my material are related to a Colombian drug cartel. I opened a case in Colombia because of the intimidation and YouTube ignored it. They even keep online material, which defames me and threatens me. I had to get psychological help, I had panic attacks and I had a problem with my PhD and my personal life. I can not return to the country, I was born because these individuals want to kill me. This claim make my life in danger because I had even been intimidate with the Miami police and FBI. My academic material has been defamed and damaged and my image had been related to prostitution and a drug cartel. I had been the victim of every psychological abuse. I had also spend so much time and money, fighting this fraud of my work.ClosedCatalina M JaramillononeYouTubeOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0020infringement-DMCA-None givenInfringing products sold by respondent contain Mr. Wright's artwork as the central feature. Respondent sold the product as a digital file that the purchasers can freely use, resell, redistribute, etc.Mr. Wright regularly licenses his artwork for minimums in excess of $5,000 per year. The sale of digital files is particularly harmful to the value of the artwork as it floods the market, thereby diminishing its value.ClosedJon Q WrightAxenfeld Law Group, LLCGeoffrey PotterOrder Dismissing Claim Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0019infringementVoice memo recorded into Iphone that was meant for the hook of the song.Infringement upon the delivery of the song, the thematic material, and lyrics.Resulted in having to change the name of the song, and rewrite the lyrics to avoid being accused of plagiarizing my own song due to being an unknown artist in the public eye. Seeking monetary relief due to most likely having to scrap the song all together due to Columbia Records stealing my intellectual property from my iphone for personal gain as if my creative work belongs to them, and is there for them to steal for free.ClosedCory D PalmernoneColumbia RecordsOrder Dismissing Claim Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0018infringementA black Great Dane spinning around facing the camera in a tan leather chair with the caption "The Dog Father"Zesty Paws illegally downloaded my short motion picture and used it on their social account without my permission.On March 16th, 2022, Zesty Paws intently stole my content from another platform to use on their TikTok. I have messages from Zesty Paws in my direct messages on Instagram dated October 15th 2021, in which they asked permission to use my content. My reply was "which one are you looking at? and let me know what you're thinking". There was never any reply from Zesty Paws and permission was never granted. My brand, Love Margot is trademarked. I am under a contractual obligation with another dog supplement brand. By Zesty Paws illegally using my content under Zesty Paws social profiles implemented to at least 1.4 million people that I represent the Zesty Paws brand when in fact, I never have. I am seeking damages of $30,000. for loss of other brand campaigns.ClosedSabrina GiardinanoneZesty PawsOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0017infringementPhotographDefendant reproduced, displayed, and distributed Plaintiff's copyrighted photograph without her consent on its commercial website and continued to do so after she provided notice of the infringement.Plaintiff lost licensing fees and the market for her work, this photograph in particular, was damaged. Defendant obtained profits from selling advertising against this photograph that should be disgorged. Defendant built the value of its site by exploiting this photograph, and a portion of that value should be disgorged.ClosedDana LixenbergDoniger / BurroughsHypebeast, Ltd.Order Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0016Not availableNANANot availableClosedSee captionNot availableSee captionOrder Dismissing Claim Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0015infringementFull length Young Adult novel; urban fantasy; paranormalThe author is a minority female writer based in Australia. Disney-Hyperion, an imprint and/or subsidiary of the other two respondents, sublicensed the rights to the two titles in question from the author’s primary publisher, HarperCollins Australia via its UK sibling entity, HarperCollins UK (“HCUK”) on 23 September 2010. The author sought a reversion of those rights back from Disney-Hyperion to HarperCollins due to repeated contractual breaches by Disney-Hyperion. Rights were reverted as between Disney-Hyperion and HCUK effective 29 July 2014. On 31 January 2022, HarperCollins Australia reverted the rights to the two titles in question under the head agreement to the author who, on that date, assigned the copyright in those two titles to the claimant. Both HarperCollins Australia and HarperCollins UK have since confirmed to the author and claimant in writing that all rights in the 'Mercy' Series (including Mercy and Exile) by Rebecca Lim have been reverted to the author by both entities and that the author is free to dispose of rights in her works as she will. On 5 March 2022 (Australian time), the author discovered that Disney Publishing has continued to distribute the twThe claimant seeks statutory damages of $7,500 per title ($15,000 in total for this proceeding) as the continued existence, availability and distribution of the Disney-Hyperion versions have caused reputational damage to the author, lost sales to the author, exposed the author to continued piracy (over a period of successive years, both the author and the claimant have issued multiple DCMA takedown notices from Australia in relation to the Disney version of the titles) and competed with the claimant's own re-issued editions of the two titles. The claimant cannot prove, based on the claimant's relative lack of bargaining power, its jurisdiction of domicile and inability to seek proper discovery and accounting from Disney, through which channels Disney has distributed the two titles, and how Disney has profited from the infringements.CertifiedMorly Investments Pty Ltd (imprint: The High Street Publishing Company)noneThe Walt Disney CompanyExhibit 5 March 26, 2022 demand letter - Redacted.pdf
22-CCB-0014infringementPictorial and graphic features identified separately from and capable of existing independently of the utilitarian aspects of a useful article.As set forth above, the Dolls Kill Copyrights are valid and owned by Dolls Kill, and have been registered with the U.S. Copyright Office. Defendant, without the permission or consent of Dolls Kill, has designed, manufactured, produced, distributed, marketed, promoted, offered for sale and sold the infringing Materials which is identical and/or substantially similar to the Dolls Kill Copyrights. Specifically, The website located at https://www.anotherchill.com/ ("Defendant") contains works that infringe upon Dolls Kill’s Copyrighted photos and designs ("Copyrighted Material"). Dolls Kill sent a first takedown notice per the Digital Millenium Copyright Act ("DMCA") to Defendant's service provider on January 31, 2022. The work was removed but more infringing content was discovered in April 2022. Dolls Kill sent another takedown notice and the work was allegedly removed from Defendant's website. On June 15, 2022 Dolls Kill discovered several additional copies on Defendant's websites. It thus appears that Defendant willfully and repetitively infringes upon Dolls Kill's rights, despite Dolls Kill's efforts to resolve this issue without court intervention.By reason of the foregoing, Defendant has infringed and continues to infringe, the Dolls Kill Copyrights in violation of, without limitation, the exclusive rights of reproduction and distribution and the exclusive right to prepare derivative works under section 106 of the Copyright Act, and section 501 of the Copyright Act. Defendant’s infringement of the Dolls Kill Copyrights has been and continues to be intentional, willful, and with full knowledge of Dolls Kill’s rights pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 505. As a direct and proximate result of its infringing conduct, Defendant has made and will continue to make substantial profits and gains to which it is not entitled to actual damages, and Defendant's profits attributable to Defendant's infringement. Alternatively, Dolls Kill is entitled to the maximum statutory damages, the costs of this action and such other amounts as the Court deems proper and within the limit authorized by this Court.ClosedDolls Kill, Inc.noneAnother ChillOrder Dismissing Claim Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0013infringementA historical fiction/ fantasy work published in the juvenile fiction categories under the imprint "Pacific Books"Copies of this work were produced, distributed, and sold prior to publication, including manuscript/drafts of this work that were not released to the public. Formal letters to cease and desist unlawful distribution were knowingly ignored and unacted upon.Formal letters to cease and desist unlawful distribution were knowingly ignored and unacted upon, resulting in several works distributed to the public prior to publication. Many of these works were incomplete manuscripts of our authors work. This caused an immeasurable amount of damage to our organization and the author, damaging author credibility, damaging company reputation in the field as a new publishing agency, establishing a significant loss in marking/public credibility and perception, resulting in poor reviews which further damaged sales, and causing extreme mental duress to our author and publication team.ClosedTactical Training Academy LLC, DBA Pacific BooksnoneIngram Content Group, Lightning Source LLCOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0012infringementInstructions and paper prompts for an essay that students were required to write in a university course that I teach.EssayZoo markets itself to college students and describes itself as "the Most Reliable Place to Buy Pre Written Essays" (essayzoo.org, accessed 6/16/22). Between 5/8/21 and 3/21/22, a subpage on essayzoo.org publicly displayed the instructions provided to EssayZoo by a past customer. Those instructions provided to EssayZoo by the customer included material for which I own the copyright, namely, instructions and paper prompts for an essay that students are required to write in a course that I teach. This claim is not being brought against EssayZoo due to their storage of or referral or linking to infringing material posted by others. The infringing material was not posted directly by the customer in this case. Instead, that material was submitted by the customer to EssayZoo through fillable forms available on the latter's website, as part of the process by which the customer ordered written work from EssayZoo, and EssayZoo later posted the customer's instructions along with (1) a preview of the work produced for the customer, and (2) an option to download the entire work for $4.32. In addition, even if this claim were being brought against EssayZoo due to their storage of or rI intend to ask for statutory damages in the amount of $7,500. I am asking for such damages in order to deter future infringements, as they undermine the integrity of the courses that I teach and the grades that I assign in those courses.CertifiedBenjamin BronnernoneEssayZooFirst Default Notice
22-CCB-0011infringementFour Photographs of The Residences at 66 High Street in Guilford, CTSee supplementary materialSee supplementary materialClosedDennis CarboHigbee & AssociatesLuchs Consulting Engineers, LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0010infringement2D fairy wing designMy own photos of my design were used in image edits and displayed on 11:11 Digital / Paris Hilton's social media accounts without my permission. The same IP, Titania Fairy Wings, has actually been infringed 3 different times by Paris Hilton / 11:11 Digital. The first time I became aware of one on Instagram, I sent a DMCA notice to Paris' company, at management@parishiltonentertainment.com on 9/17/2020 for the Sept. 2020 infringement, as that was the one I became aware of first, requesting removal of the infringing work from Paris' Instagram account. I received no response, but it was removed roughly a week later after gaining over at least 800,000 views. That content used the wing image directly from my listing graphic for the digital overlays I sell for the purpose of photo editing, seen in my store here: https://fancy-fairy-wings-things.myshopify.com/products/titania-fairy-wings-transparency-stock-png-files An error is showing for the documents I'm trying to attach which show how my work was used, but you can see more details in a blog post I made about it here: https://www.fancyfairy.com/news/2020/9/17/infringement-is-not-hot-paris-hilton The 2nd time I noticed an infrinThe use of my IP by Paris Hilton companies has harmed my market, by exposing it to potentially millions of people without my name attached. My infringements of this IP have increased greatly in the last 3 years but especially in the last 2. I believe these infringements played a part in that by giving Paris' viewers the impression that my IP is a freely available work to use should they find it being distributed (illegally) online. I believe it may also be causing brand confusion between myself and a competing fairy wing maker, HelloFaerie, who engaged in slandering me a few years ago when she was trying to compete in the market. HelloFaerie has been providing Paris with her fairy wings for the last 2 or 3 years. Her business was built upon the foundation my work created. Since these infringements, I have been incorrectly credited or tagged as the wing maker in posts showing HelloFaerie's work quite a few times. This has been adding insult to injury. I am seeking roughly $12,000 in relief, based on previous copyright settlements for online displays of my work and due to the frequency with which the same IP has been infringed by Paris / 11:11 Digital.ClosedAngela M Jarmannone11:11 DigitalOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0009infringementSound recordingA single entitled, “Def Mix” recorded by Ondamike and released by Ravesta Records which interpolates DM’s track, “Techno Bass (Eurobass Mix)" performed by BASS 305. DM Records, Inc. (DM) is the sole and exclusive owner of the copyright to the master recording and music composition. In direct and willful contravention of DM’s exclusive rights under 17 U.S.C. Section 101 et seq., and in particular those enumerated in 17 U.S.C. Section 106, Ravestra is infringing on DM’s rights by sampling and reproducing the above-listed song.Both the sound recording and composition have been blatant and intentional acts of infringement by Ravestra. DM tried to negotiate with them, but had no response. DM asked them to take down the infringing material, but they did not. DM is requesting the maximum award for damages.ClosedDM Records, Inc.noneRAVESTA, LLCOrder Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0008infringementPhotographs taken of a trip down the Mississippi River for the upcoming book by author RINKER BUCK. The book will be released August 9 through Simon & Schuster. I was brought along as the photographer. I own all contentThe owner of this offending website, Scott Mandrell, has stolen content for his website. The images where all taken by me and are part of a book project soon to be published by Simon and Schuster. The book is on the history of the great American rivers specifically the Flatboat era to the present written by RINKER BUCK. Mr. Buck is a longtime associate. Rinker Buck is a New York Times best-selling author of several books. I was along on the trip as the official photographer among other duties. We build a replica 18 century Flatboat and sailed it from Elizabeth Pennsylvania to New Orleans in the summer of 2016 to prepare to write the history. Mr. Mandrell was on our replica boat for a bit. He was thrown off after erratic, racist and violent behavior at the very beginning of the trip. He took the images from the official website for the project. I texted him and asked him politely to remove them and he refused and threatened me. I then sent him two registered emails asking him to take down the contact. . He is doing this simply to undermine the value of the images for the book. I am the copyright holder and the photographer who took them. I spent 20 years as a photojournalist at theThese images were created specifically for Bucks Book and for the official website promoting the trip. Some of the images will appear in the book but have lost their value because I have lost control of them. Mr. Mandrell stated in his text the vindictive nature of his use of these images. Because of Mr. Mandrell's activities the images may not be used in the book. And if they are at a significant loss in value.CertifiedDaniel C CorjulononeScott MandrellOrder to Submit Default Direct Party Statement
22-CCB-0007infringementPhotograph of Local Politician regarding Environmental ActivismRespondent reproduced, displayed, and distributed unauthorized copies of Claimant’s Groby Photograph on its website, thehayride.com. Respondent reproduced, displayed, and distributed unauthorized copies of Claimant’s Flooding Photograph on its website, thehayride.com, and additionally created an unauthorized derivative work by superimposing the text “Everyday I’m Hustlin’” over the Flooding Photograph and otherwise altering that Photograph. In addition, despite the presence of Claimant’s authorship credit when the photographs were first published on two separate authorized third-party websites, in each case with authorship credits indicating Julie Dermansky as the author, Respondent omitted Claimant’s name from the infringing articles, inducing, facilitating, and encouraging further downstream infringement. Claimant never authorized Respondent to reproduce, publish, display, or make use of any kind of the Photographs.$30,000 (15 x 2) - Lost license fees/royalties - Disgorgement of Respondent’s profits - Omitted attribution induced, facilitated, and encouraged further downstream infringement - Creation and exploitation of unauthorized derivative work.ClosedJulie DermanskyLeichtman Law PLLCHayride Media, LLCOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice
22-CCB-0006infringementPaintingPetitioner was commissioned by a company called NINE Dot Arts, which advertises itself as an art consultant and art curator, to have the Copyrighted Work reproduced and affixed upon the walls of a parking garage located at 410 17th Street in Denver, Colorado. Respondent has numerous multimedia initiatives, including the magazine publication of Graphics Pro. In or around May 2021, Respondent exploited the Copyrighted Work by unlawfully reproducing and distributing a copy of it in its magazine, Graphics Pro. Further, Respondent unlawfully reproduced and distributed photographs of the Copyrighted Work on its social media platforms in order to promote an upcoming exposition it was hosting. These unlawful and repeated displays of Petitioner’s Copyrighted Work were done without Petitioner’s permission or knowledge, resulting in potential lost sales and future marketing of the Copyrighted Work.By failing to obtain Petitioner’s authorization to use the Copyrighted Work or to compensate Petitioner for their various uses, Respondents have avoided payment of license fees and other financial costs associated with obtaining permission to exploit the Copyrighted Work, as well as the restrictions that Petitioner is entitled to and would place on any such exploitation as conditions for Petitioner’s permission, including the right to deny permission altogether.ClosedMax KauffmanHoward O. Bernstein, P.C.National Business Media, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0005infringementPhotograph of Exxon oil refinery.Respondent, through its Healing Properties’ website, reproduced, displayed, and distributed unauthorized copies of Claimant’s Photograph on healingproperties.org. In addition, despite the presence of Claimant’s authorship credit when the photograph was first published on an authorized third-party website, with an authorship credit indicating Julie Dermansky as the author, Respondent omitted Claimant’s name from the infringing article, inducing, facilitating, and encouraging further downstream infringement. Claimant never authorized Respondent to reproduce, publish, display, or make use of any kind of the Photograph.$15,000 - Statutory damages - Lost license fees/royalties - Disgorgement of Respondent’s profits - Omitted attribution induced, facilitated, and encouraged further downstream infringementCertifiedJulie DermanskyLeichtman Law PLLCRule 62, Inc.Second Notice sent on 2/16/23
22-CCB-0004infringementBLACK & WHITE PORTRAIT OF MILES DAVIS WITH FINGER TO LIPSRESPONDENTS REPRODUCED, DISTRIBUTED, DISPLAYED AND ALTERED THE WORKS ON RESPONDENTS' WEBSITES, AND ON SOCIAL MEDIA INCLUDING FACEBOOK INSTAGRAM OPEN TABLE YELP AND OTHER PLATFORMS, EXPLOITING THE WORKS FOR COMMERCIAL ADVERTISING PURPOSES AND FOR BRANDING PURPOSESLOST LICENSING FEES, DEFENDANTS ILL GAINED PROFITS, DEVALUATION OF WORKS. SEEKING ACTUAL DAMAGES AND PROFITS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, STATUTORY DAMAGES. SEEKING COSTS OF SUIT.CertifiedJEFFREY B SEDLIKnoneCULINARY INVESTMENTS, LLCOrder Regarding Request for Standard Protective Order
22-CCB-0003infringementPhotograph of Herman Cain at political rallyRespondent reproduced, displayed, and distributed unauthorized copies of Claimant’s Photograph on its website, wrcbtv.com. In addition, Claimant believes that WRCB-TV, which is an NBC Television affiliate, obtained the Photograph from some other entity within the NBC family of companies, which had many years earlier licensed the Photograph from Corbis/Getty Images. That license expired before WRCB-TV’s use and required the crediting of Claimant in connection with the license. Therefore, at the time of Respondent’s reproduction, display, and distribution of the Photograph on its website, Claimant had not granted Respondent any license or permission to reproduce, publicly display, or otherwise use the Photograph for any purpose. Further, Respondent omitted Claimant’s name from the infringing article, despite the expired license requiring authorship credit, therefore, inducing, facilitating, and encouraging further downstream infringement. Claimant never authorized Respondent to reproduce, publish, display, or make use of any kind of the Photograph.$15,000 - Lost license fees/royalties - Disgorgement of Respondent’s profits - Omitted attribution induced, facilitated, and encouraged further downstream infringement - Used beyond temporal limitation and scope of licenseClosedJulie DermanskyLeichtman Law PLLCSarkes Tarzian, Inc.Order Dismissing Claim
22-CCB-0002infringementPaintingPetitioner was commissioned by a company called NINE Dot Arts, which advertises itself as an art consultant and art curator, to have the Copyrighted Work reproduced and affixed upon the walls of a parking garage located at 410 17th Street in Denver, Colorado. Respondents operate a print shop in Denver, Colorado that creates custom vinyl prints and offers large format printing and design services. After commissioning the project from Petitioner, NINE Dot Arts independently hired Respondents to reproduce and install the Copyrighted Work onto the parking garage. Respondents did not have any relationship or contract with Petitioner. Respondents completed the installation of the Copyrighted Work for NINE Dot Arts on the parking garage on or around July 17, 2020. After the Copyrighted Work was installed on the parking garage, Respondents began to repeatedly use and share the Copyrighted Work for its own commercial purposes without notice to or authorization from Petitioner. Respondents have exploited the Copyrighted Work by publicly displaying it on their website without authorized use, using the Copyrighted Work to promote their personal services, and passing off the Copyrighted Work asBy failing to obtain Petitioner’s authorization to use the Copyrighted Work or to compensate Petitioner for their various uses, Respondents have avoided payment of license fees and other financial costs associated with obtaining permission to exploit the Copyrighted Work, as well as the restrictions that Petitioner is entitled to and would place on any such exploitation as conditions for Petitioner’s permission, including the right to deny permission altogether.ClosedMax KauffmanHoward O. Bernstein, P.C.AAS Printing Inc. d/b/a Ink MonsterOrder Dismissing Without Prejudice - AAS Printing Inc.
22-CCB-0001infringementPhotograph of Donald Trump at political rallyRespondent reproduced, displayed, and distributed unauthorized copies of Claimant’s Photograph on yellowhammernews.com in three separate articles. In addition, despite the presence of Claimant’s authorship credit when the photograph was first published by Claimant, with a copyright notice indicating Julie Dermansky as the rightsholder, in some places Respondent omitted Claimant’s name and copyright notice from the infringing articles, and in other places Respondent attributed the Photograph falsely to another photographer, inducing, facilitating, and encouraging further downstream infringement. Claimant never authorized Respondent to reproduce, publish, display, or make use of any kind of the Photograph.$15,000 - Statutory damages - Lost license fees/royalties - Disgorgement of Respondent’s profits - False and missing attribution induced, facilitated, and encouraged further downstream infringementClosedJulie DermanskyLeichtman Law PLLCYellowhammer Multimedia, LLCOrder Dismissing Claim