Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01292/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01292-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:501 Copyright Infringement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 1 - 06cv1292

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WARNER BROS. RECORDS INC., et al.

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. 06cv1292 JM(LSP)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR

vs. DEFAULT JUDGMENT

KATHY BURRIS

Defendant.

Plaintiffs Warner Bros. Record, Inc., Capitol Records, Inc., UMG recordings,

Inc., and Arista Records LLC (collectively “Plaintiffs”) move for entry of default

judgment against Defendant Kathy Burris in the amount of $4,990 and to permanently

enjoin her from directly or indirectly infringing Plaintiffs’ copyrights. Kathy Burris has

not appeared in this action. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(d)(1), this matter is appropriate

for decision without oral argument. For the reasons set forth below, the court enters

default judgment against Plaintiff in the total amount of $4,900 and grants the motion

for permanent injunction. 

BACKGROUND

On June 20, 2006 Plaintiffs commenced this copyright infringement action

against Burris alleging that she violated Plaintiffs’ copyrights by downloading

copyrighted materials from the internet. (Compl. ¶12). Defendant has been served with

the summons and complaint but has yet to appear in this action.

Case 3:06-cv-01292-JM-LSP Document 13 Filed 11/26/07 Page 1 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 - 06cv1292

On July 25, 2007 the Clerk of Court entered default against Defendant. Plaintiffs

now move for default judgment in the amount of $4,500, costs in the amount of $490.

and a permanent injunction to enjoin Defendant from any future conduct that infringes

their copyrights. Defendant has not responded to the motion for default judgment.

DISCUSSION

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b) provides, in pertinent part, that after entry

of default, “the party entitled to a judgment by default, shall apply to the court therefor.”

Ordinarily, the default itself established the defendant’s liability. “Upon default, the

well-pleaded allegations of the complaint relating to liability are taken as true,” but not

allegations as to the amount of damages. Dundee Cement Co. v. Howard Pipe &

concrete Products, 722 F.2d. 1319, 1323 (3rd Cir. 1983); TeleVideo systems Inc. v.

Heidenthal, 826 F.2d. 915, 917 (9th Cir. 1994). The amount of damages may be

determined from the allegations of the complaint although those allegations are not

controlling. Dundee, 722 F.2d. at 1323-24. Where plaintiff is entitled to reasonable

attorney’s fees by either contract or statute, the court will determine the amount to be

awarded. James v. Frame, 6 F.3d 307, 311 (3rd Cir. 1993).

The granting or denying of a default judgment is within the court’s sound

discretion. Draper v. Combs, 792 F.2d 915 (9th Cir. 19986). The following factors are

considered in determining whether to grant a default judgment: the substantive merits

of plaintiff’s claim; the sufficiency of the complaint; the amount of money at stake; the

possibility of prejudice to plaintiff if relief is denied; and the possibility of dispute as

to any material facts in the case. Moreover, where practicable, policy considerations

militate in favor of considering cases on their merits rather than resolving matters

through default judgment procedures. Schwab v. Bullock's, Inc., 508 F.2d 353, 355

(9th Cir. 1974).

Here, the complaint’s allegations establish that Plaintiffs are entitled to entry of

default judgment on its claims for copyright infringement because Defendant infringed

Plaintiffs’ exclusive rights under the Copyright Act. See 17 U.S.C. §§ 106, 501(a)-(b).

Case 3:06-cv-01292-JM-LSP Document 13 Filed 11/26/07 Page 2 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 - 06cv1292

Plaintiffs have demonstrated ownership of the copyrights at issue and that Defendant,

without permission from Plaintiffs, used an online media distribution system to

download the recordings. (Compl. ¶¶10-16). Consequently, the court concludes that

the complaint’s allegations adequately establish liability on the copyright claim. 

The only other issue concerns the amount of damages. Plaintiffs seek an award

of statutory damages under §504 of the Copyright Act in the total amount of $4,500, an

award of costs in the amount of $490, and to permanently enjoin Defendant from

directly or indirectly infringing their copyrights.

Plaintiffs seek statutory damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §504 which provides that

the copyright owner may elect to recover an award of statutory damages for all

infringements involved in the action in a sum of not less than $750 nor more than

$30,000. 17 U.S.C. §504(c); Los Angeles News Serv. v. Reuters Television Int’l, Ltd.,

140 F.3d 987, 1101 (9th Cir. 1998), cert.denied 525 U.S. 1141 (1999) (“a plaintiff may

recover statutory damages whether or not there is adequate evidence of the actual

damages suffered by plaintiff or the profits reaped by defendant, in order to sanction

and vindicate the statutory policy of discouraging infringement”). Plaintiffs seek the

statutory minimum of $750 for each of the six copyrights violated by Defendant. The

court finds this amount reasonable and appropriate under the circumstances.

Plaintiffs also seek an award of costs in the amount of $490 (for filing fees and

cost of service of process) pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §505. The court finds this amount

reasonable and appropriate under the circumstances.

Finally, Plaintiffs seek to permanently enjoin Defendant from violating their

copyrights pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §502(a) (the court may grant “final injunctions on

such terms as it may deem reasonable to prevent or restrain infringement of a

copyright”). A party seeking a permanent injunction must establish the requisite

success on the merits and irreparable harm to warrant injunctive relief. Arcamuzi v.

Continental Air Lines, Inc., 819 F.2d 935, 937 (9th Cir. 1987). As noted by Plaintiffs,

“[i]n copyright cases, irreparable harm is presumed on a showing of a reasonable

Case 3:06-cv-01292-JM-LSP Document 13 Filed 11/26/07 Page 3 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 4 - 06cv1292

likelihood of success on the merits, and, thus, ‘a showing of copyright infringement

liability and the threat of future violations is sufficient to warrant a permanent

injunction.’” Sega Enterprises Ltd. v. Maphia, 948 F.Supp. 923, 940 (N.D. Cal. 1996).

Here, Plaintiffs have adequately demonstrated success on the merits and that continued

violations of their copyrights would cause them irreparable harm. Further, entry of a

permanent injunction is consistent with the goals of Section 502 of the Copyright Act

to protect the public’s interest in upholding copyright protections. See Autoskill Inc.

v. National Educ. Support Sys., Inc., 994 F.2d 1476, 1499 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 510

U.S. 916 (1993). A review of the authorities submitted by Plaintiffs indicates that

courts frequently grant permanent injunctions by means of default judgment where a

defendant infringes copyrights and then fails to appear in an action to give assurances

that such activity would cease. See Jackson v. Sturke, 255 F.Supp. 2d 1096, 1103 (N.D.

Cal. 2003); Pepsi Co., Inc. v. Cal. Sec. Cans, 238 F.Supp. 2d 1172, 1177 (N.D. Cal.

2002). In sum, the court concludes, in light of the scope and nature of Defendant’s

infringement, that granting the requested permanent injunctive relief will foster public

interest in upholding copyright protection and protect Plaintiffs’ copyright interests.

In sum, the Clerk of Court is instructed to enter judgment against Defendant

Burris and in favor of Plaintiffs in the total amount of $4,990. 

IT IS ALSO ORDERED:

Defendant shall be and hereby is enjoined from directly or indirectly infringing

Plaintiffs' rights under federal or state law in the following copyrighted sound

recordings:

1. "Dreams," on album "Rumours," by artist "Fleetwood Mac" (SR# N39857);

2, "Castaway," on album "Warning," by artist "Green Day" (SR# 288-352);

3. "You Really Got Me," on album "Van Halen," by artist "Van Halen" (SR# 239);

4. "Unskinny Bop," on album "Flesh and Blood," by artist "Poison" (SR# 119-355);

5. "Doin' Time," on album "Second Hand Smoke," by artist "Sublime" (SR#

246-011);

Case 3:06-cv-01292-JM-LSP Document 13 Filed 11/26/07 Page 4 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 5 - 06cv1292

6. "Losing Grip," on album "Let Go," by artist "Avril Lavigne" (SR# 312-786);

and in any other sound recording, whether now in existence or later created, that is

owned or controlled by the Plaintiffs (or any parent, subsidiary, or affiliate record label

of Plaintiffs) ("Plaintiffs' Recordings"), including without limitation by using the

Internet or any online media distribution system to reproduce (i.e., download) any of

Plaintiffs' Recordings, to distribute (i.e., upload) any of Plaintiffs' Recordings, or to

make any of Plaintiffs' Recordings available for distribution to the public, except

pursuant to a lawful license or with the express authority of Plaintiffs. Defendant shall

also destroy all copies of Plaintiffs' Recordings that defendant has downloaded onto any

computer hard drive or server without Plaintiffs' authorization and shall destroy all

copies of those downloaded recordings transferred onto any physical medium or device

in Defendant's possession, custody, or control.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 26, 2007

 Hon. Jeffrey T. Miller

 United States District Judge

cc: All parties

Case 3:06-cv-01292-JM-LSP Document 13 Filed 11/26/07 Page 5 of 5