throbber
Case 0:19-cv-62678-RS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2019 Page 1 of 3
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`Fort Lauderdale Division
`
`
`JUSTIN GOLDMAN,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
` COMPLAINT FOR
`
`
`
`
` - against - COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
`
`COX RADIO, INC., as owner of hits973.com, JURY DEMANDED
`hot105fm.com palmbeachmgsite.com, and
`pbpulse.com,
` Defendants.
`- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
`
`
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1. This is an action for copyright infringement pursuant to the U.S. Copyright Act based
`
`on the unauthorized for-profit full display by websites operated by defendant Cox Radio, Inc.
`
`(“defendant”) of a photograph created by plaintiff (“the Photo”) that is protected by a federal
`
`copyright duly registered with the United States Copyright Office (Supplemental Certificate No.
`
`VA - 1-436-930).
`
`
`
`
`
`POSSIBLY RELEVANT DISCLOSURE
`
`2. A recently-terminated case in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New
`
`York for copyright infringement was commenced by plaintiff here against other defendants
`
`based on their unauthorized for-profit full display of the Photo. That action was Goldman v.
`
`Breitbart News Network, LLC, et al., 17 Civ. 3144 (AJN)(SN). In that action, the Honorable
`
`Katherine B. Forrest, U.S.D.J., granted summary judgment to plaintiff on a specific legal issue,
`
`namely whether the process of “embedding” provides a defense to the defendants’ alleged
`
`copyright infringements. The Court’s judgment held that embedding provided no such defense.
`
`302 F.Supp.3d 585 (S.D.N.Y. 2018).
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 0:19-cv-62678-RS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2019 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`3. Plaintiff Justin Goldman is a resident of the City and State of New York.
`
`4. On information and belief, defendant is a business entity based in Atlanta, Georgia,
`
`that owns and operates the websites hits973.com, hot105fm.com, palmbeachmgsite.com, and
`
`pbpulse.com (“defendant’s Websites”) in this district, including in Broward County, Florida, and
`
`that committed the copyright infringements that are the subject of this action and is legally
`
`responsible therefor in this district.
`
`
`
`
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`5. This Court has jurisdiction over this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1338. Venue in this
`
`district is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1400(a).
`
`
`
`
`
`UNDERLYING FACTS
`
`6. On July 2, 2016, plaintiff created the Photo and he is the owner of a duly-issued
`
`registered copyright in it. A copy of the Photo is annexed hereto as Exhibit “A.”
`
`
`
`7. Without plaintiff’s knowledge or consent, the Photo was uploaded that day to the
`
`Internet.
`
`
`
`8. On information and belief, on or about July 2, 2016 and thereafter defendant’s Web-
`
`sites, without any legal authority to do so, prominently displayed, in full and in full color, for for-
`
`profit purposes, a copy of the Photo.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CAUSE OF ACTION FOR
`COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT
`
`9. Plaintiff incorporates here the contents of Paragraphs 1 through 8 above.
`
`10. The United States Copyright Act grants to all copyright owners the "exclusive right"
`
`to "display" their copyrighted works "publicly," 17 U.S.C. §106(5), and the Act defines "display"
`
`as "to show a copy of it, either directly or by means of a film, slide, television image, or any
`
`other device or process or, in the case of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to show
`
`
`

`

`Case 0:19-cv-62678-RS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2019 Page 3 of 3
`
`
`
`individual images nonsequentially." 17 U.S.C. §101. Defendant’s Websites violated plaintiff’s
`
`“exclusive right” to “display” the Photo by their public display of it without plaintiff’s
`
`knowledge or consent. Accordingly, defendant is liable to plaintiff for the infringements by its
`
`Websites of plaintiff’s registered copyright in the Photo.
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, with respect to each act of copyright infringement by defendant’s Web-
`
`sites, plaintiff demands judgment a) issuing a permanent injunction preventing defendant’s Web-
`
`sites from making any further unauthorized use or display of the Photo; b) awarding to plaintiff
`
`all appropriate damages, including statutory damages, as determined by the Court or jury; c)
`
`awarding to plaintiff profits attributable to each infringement; d) awarding to plaintiff costs and
`
`attorneys' fees; e) awarding all appropriate interest; and f) awarding such other relief as the Court
`
`deems just.
`
`
`
`Dated: October 27, 2019
`
`
`
`/s/Joshua Spector
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Joshua B. Spector
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Law Offices of Joshua Spector, P.A.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`283 Catalonia Avenue, Second Floor
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Miami, FL 33134
`
`
`
`
`
`
`786-786-7272
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Email: joshua@spectorlegal.com
`
`
`
`
` Kenneth P. Norwick
` Pro Hac Vice to be requested
` Norwick & Schad
`
`
`
`
`
`
`110 East 59th Street
` New York, New York 10022
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(212) 751-4440
` ken@norwickschad.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket