Articles Posted in Copyright Infringement

The Plaintiffs, House of Bram, Little Nemo Music, and Major Bob Music Co., through their lawyers, have filed a lawsuit claiming that their copyrights have been violated under U.S. copyright law. Their main argument is that the Defendants allegedly played the Plaintiffs’ copyrighted music in public without permission.

Defendant Franklinsteins, LLC is based in Indiana and operates Bud’s Rockin’ Country Bar and Grill in Evansville, Indiana, where the music in question is said to have been played publicly. The other Defendants, Kerry Chesser, Chad Brady, and Mikala Daly-Shemwell, are individuals involved in managing Franklinsteins. The Plaintiffs claim that all Defendants had control over what happened at Bud’s, including the music performances.

The Plaintiffs are members of ASCAP (the American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers), which protects the public performance rights for its members’ music. The complaint states that ASCAP has attempted to contact the Defendants more than 70 times through phone, mail, and email, offering them licenses to play the music. Despite these efforts, the Defendants allegedly refused to agree to the terms, and the Plaintiffs argue that the performances at Bud’s without a license are copyright violations.

August Image, LLC, a company based in New York that represents over 100 photographers, is suing Static Media Inc. (formerly 7Hops.com Inc.) for copyright infringement. The lawsuit involves two photographs owned by photographers Peter Yang and Benedict Evans, who are both represented by August Image. Yang’s photo features Eddie Van Halen and his son Wolfgang, while Evans’ photo shows gamer Tyler “Ninja” Blevins.

The company claims that Static Media used these images without permission on its websites, including Mashed.com and SVG.com, in 2021 and 2020. August Image says Static Media never reached out to get the proper licensing, even though the photos are professional work and not meant to be used freely.

August Image purports to hold the exclusive rights to these photos through agreements with the photographers and argues that Static Media’s actions were a clear violation of copyright. The company is asking for damages, any profits made from using the photos, and for Static Media to cover the legal costs. They also want a court order to stop Static Media from using the images again without permission.

Christopher Sadowski, a photojournalist from New Jersey, has filed a lawsuit against Fortner Services Inc., operating as Fortner Pest Control, for alleged copyright infringement. Sadowski, who has been published in various prominent outlets, including the New York Post and USA Today, has built a reputation not only for his award-winning photography but also for his diligent efforts to protect his intellectual property.  Over the years, he has filed multiple copyright infringement claims against various parties for unauthorized use of his work (See previous blog posts about these suits here, here, here, and here.).

As a self-employed photographer, Sadowski owns the rights to his work and licenses his photographs under terms that retain his copyright. The current suit states that in 2022, Sadowski created a photograph titled “112120rat5CS,” which was registered with the U.S. Copyright Office in December 2022. The photograph was later licensed to the New York Post and appeared in an article, with appropriate attribution to Sadowski.

Fortner Services, a pest control company based in Bedford, Indiana, operates a website and maintains a presence on social media. On December 13, 2023, Fortner allegedly displayed Sadowski’s copyrighted photograph on its website and social media without obtaining permission. Sadowski claims that Fortner did not contact him to request a license for use of the image, which was intended for commercial purposes.

Author, Dr. Keith F. Bell (“Plaintiff”), has filed another copyright infringement suit in Indiana (see past suit), this time against Bartholomew Consolidated School Corporation (“Bartholomew”) and Timothy Bless (“Bless”), again claiming infringement of his intellectual property. Dr. Bell wrote the book Winning Isn’t Normal in 1981, and the key passage titled “Winning Isn’t Normal” (WIN) is central to the book. Dr. Bell holds the copyrights for both the book and WIN, registered with the U.S. Copyright Office. He has invested significant effort in promoting his work, which is sold through his websites and various products like posters and t-shirts.

Dr. Bell alleges that Bless, as an employee of Bartholomew and a coach at Columbus North High School, used his copyrighted material without permission by posting a representation of the WIN chapter on social media in March 2022. Dr. Bell claims this act violated his exclusive rights, including reproduction, distribution, and public display of his intellectual property. He asserts that Bartholomew was aware of the infringement and failed to prevent it, benefiting from the activities linked to Bless’s posts. Additionally, Dr. Bell accuses the defendants of removing copyright management information from his work, violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

Dr. Bell further states that Bartholomew and Bless had previously entered into a settlement agreement in 2020, where they agreed to cease using WIN without proper authorization. He claims that the defendants’ actions in 2022 breached that agreement. As a result, Dr. Bell seeks injunctive relief, attorney’s fees, and damages up to $150,000 per infringed work.

Plainfield, Indiana – Allen Lee Asher-Butler has filed a copyright infringement suit against Amazon KDP and Jeff Bezos, claiming they are committing copyright infringement regarding four books that he designed and illustrated the covers for. According to Asher, these books, authored by William “Will” Wills, have been sold by Amazon since 2009 without his authorization. Despite submitting a copyright infringement claim to Amazon, Asher asserts that the books have continued to be available in both Kindle and paperback formats.

This is not the first time Asher has pursued legal action against Amazon regarding this dispute. He previously filed a nearly identical lawsuit (see previous blog post), but the court dismissed his case due to procedural issues. Asher filed the original lawsuit in November 2020, but from the outset, he faced difficulties. He filed motions requesting assistance with serving the Defendants, which were both denied in 2021. The court explained that it could not provide service assistance because Asher was not proceeding in forma pauperis, meaning he did not qualify for free legal services. The court also ordered Asher to show cause as to why his case should not be dismissed due to his failure to prosecute the claims.

In January 2022, the court ultimately dismissed Asher’s case without prejudice, stating that his summons did not meet legal requirements and that he had missed the deadline to serve the Defendants. Asher responded by filing a handwritten summons, but this was not sufficient to address the deficiencies in his filing. The court emphasized that Asher had been given multiple opportunities to remedy these issues but failed to do so.