IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

LARRY HEARD, professionally known as “Mr. 

Fingers” and ROBERT OWEN, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

TRAX RECORDS, INC., PRECISION/TRAX 

RECORDS, an entity of unknown legal origins, 

RACHAEL SHERMAN née RACHAEL CAIN 

p/k/a SCREAMIN’ RACHAEL, doing business 

as SCREAMING RACHAEL CAIN MUSIC 

and TRAX RECORDS, and JOHN DOES 1-10, 

Defendants. 

 

Case No. 

COMPLAINT 

Plaintiffs, Larry Heard and Robert Owens (“Plaintiffs”), by their undersigned attorneys, 

hereby submit their Complaint against defendants Trax Records, Inc., Precision/Trax Records, 

Rachael Sherman née Rachael Cain p/k/a Screamin’ Rachael d/b/a Screaming Rachael, Cain 

Music, and Trax Records (collectively, “Defendants”), and allege as follows: 

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

1. This case involves an all-too familiar story of the early days of the music industry. 

Talented, but unrepresented, musicians hungry for their first break were lulled into a business 

relationship with an unscrupulous record company that made promises it never intended to keep 

and masqueraded as paternalistic benefactors for those artists – like a wolf in sheep’s clothing. 

2. The musicians sometimes signed away valuable rights to their music for 

consideration that was not merely inadequate, but it was never paid. Even worse, the record 

company exploited the artists’ other musical works with neither permission nor license to further 

reap the fruits of their creative output. Eventually, the artists were relegated to mere commodities 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 1 of 27 PageID #:3
2

whose professional names were slapped onto vinyl records or other goods exploited by the record 

company to lure consumers who understood that the artist’s professional name was a sign of great 

value. 

3. This is the story of Larry Heard, Robert Owens, and Trax Records. 

4. During the decades since Defendants first began exploiting musical works created by 

Larry Heard and/or Robert Owens, neither Heard nor Owens was properly compensated for the 

great value of each’s musical labors. Instead, Defendants enriched themselves and brazenly 

exploited those musical works for their sole benefit, while encouraging and enabling others to do 

the same. 

5. And it does not end with just Heard and Owens; there are many others. 5Mag.net 

magazine recently reported the following about Trax Records and its deceased founder Larry 

Sherman: 

Listeners and today’s collectors often complain about poor pressings with 

“pops” and imperfections, reputedly from the use of cheap or recycled vinyl. 

Many of 5 Mag’s early profiles of some of Chicago House Music’s legends 

outlined the feeling by the then-young, often black artists of exploitation. 

Jamie Principle told 5 Mag in 2011 that he never had a contract of any kind 

with Trax, while DJ Pierre of Phuture, whose Acid Tracks was released on 

Trax, claimed he never received any royalties at all from the label for what 

became one of the best-selling tracks of all time. 

6. DJ Magazine reported on the death of Larry Sherman and stated, “Sherman’s legacy 

is a complex one, however, with an alleged history of not paying royalties, not providing artists 

with proper contracts, and using cheap, poor quality vinyl.” 

7. It also happened with another house-music legend known as ”Frankie Knuckles,” an 

American DJ, record producer, and remixer who, like Owens and Heard, played an important role 

in developing and popularizing house music in Chicago during the 1980s. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 2 of 27 PageID #:4
3

8. Before his untimely death in 2014, Knuckles had called the Trax Records group 

“barnacles” because “[a]nytime I got some new product coming out they try and piggyback on 

whatever that it is that I'm doing to try and make whatever they can make off of it.” 

9. When Knuckles died, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel said Chicago had “lost one of 

its most treasured cultural pioneers.” Cain issued a press release where she said, in part: “I want to 

thank people around the world, especially those in dance music culture for honoring Frankie 

Knuckles. There is no doubt that his music, and the love he shared has changed the lives of so 

many. Though tragically we have lost him in the physical sense, his legacy and the music he 

created will never die...House Music would not exist as it does today without Frankie Knuckles.” 

10. So true, but Knuckles could have died a richer man and been able to leave something 

to his heirs, if only Trax had paid him what it owed for its exploitation of his music. 

11. Adonis M. Smith, professionally known as “Adonis,” is yet another artist and 

producer who was cheated by Trax. Adonis recently confirmed on Facebook that he never received 

any royalties for all of his music released by Trax Records – for the past 34 years – which include 

the pioneering 1986 acid house track No Way Back and We're Rocking Down The House. Indeed, 

a fundraiser was recently set up which aims to financially help Adonis because of this decadeslong non-payment of royalties he is owed by Trax Records. 

12. Adonis illustrated the issue addressed in this lawsuit with a recent posting on his 

Facebook page: 

Do not buy or support Trax Records! Because this label has not paid me 

one penny in 34 years. Trax Records do not own any rights to my music. 

Please share this post everywhere. Also tell all distributors to do not sell 

this record or any other of my songs from this horrible label. Enough is 

enough. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 3 of 27 PageID #:5
4

13. This action seeks to vindicate Plaintiffs’ rights in various musical compositions and 

sound recordings that they created in the 1980s. Enough is enough. 

PARTIES

14. Plaintiff, Larry Heard, professionally known as “Mr. Fingers” (“Heard”), is a resident 

of the State of Pennsylvania. 

15. Plaintiff, Robert Owens (“Owens”), is a resident of the State of Ohio. 

16. Defendant Trax Records, Inc. (“Trax Inc.”), is a corporation created under the laws 

of the State of Illinois, having a principal place of business in the City of Chicago. 

17. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that Defendant 

Precision/Trax Records (“Precision/Trax”) is an entity of unknown legal origins, having a principal 

place of business in the City of Chicago, and at all relevant times was owned and operated by Larry 

Sherman (“Sherman”). Larry Sherman died on April 8, 2020, at the age of 70. 

18. Defendant, Trax Records, Ltd. (“Trax Ltd.”), was a corporation created under the 

laws of the State of Illinois, having a principal place of business in the City of Chicago. Trax Ltd. 

was administratively dissolved in 1980. 

19. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that at all relevant 

times, Precision/Trax and Trax Ltd. conducted business through its principal owners and officers 

Sherman and Rachel Cain. 

20. Defendant Rachael Sherman née Rachael Cain, professionally known as “Screamin’ 

Rachael” is a resident of Chicago, Illinois. Cain operates a music publishing business through a 

wholly owned publishing entity “Screaming Rachael Cain Music” (hereinafter Rachael Sherman 

and Screaming Rachael Cain Music shall be collectively referred to as “Cain”). 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 4 of 27 PageID #:6
5

21. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that Cain is an owner 

and officer of Defendants Trax Records, Ltd. and Trax Records, Inc. 

22. John Does 1-10 represent the individuals or companies through which Sherman 

and/or Cain transact business, the identities of which are presently unknown to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs 

therefore sues these Defendants by fictitious names. Plaintiffs will amend this Complaint to allege 

the true names and capacities of these John Doe Defendants when ascertained. 

23. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that there exists, and at 

all times herein mentioned there existed, a unity of interest and ownership between and among 

Defendants Cain and Does 1 through 10, inclusive, on the one hand, and Precision/Trax, Trax Ltd. 

and/or Trax, Inc., on the other, such that any individuality or separateness between them has 

ceased, and that they and each of them are the alter egos of each other. Plaintiffs are further 

informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that adherence to the fiction of the separate 

existence of these Defendants would permit an abuse of the corporate privilege and would promote 

injustice. 

24. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that there exists, and at 

all times herein mentioned there existed, a unity of interest and ownership between Precision/Trax, 

Trax Ltd. and Trax, Inc., and Does 1 through 10, inclusive, such that any individuality or 

separateness between them has ceased, and that Precision/Trax, Trax Ltd. and Trax, Inc., and Does 

1 through 5 are the alter egos of each other. Plaintiffs are further informed and believe, and based 

thereon allege, that adherence to the fiction of the separate existence of Precision/Trax, Trax Ltd. 

and Trax, Inc., and Does 1 through 10 as entities distinct from each other would permit an abuse 

of the corporate privilege and would promote injustice. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 5 of 27 PageID #:7
6

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

25. This is an action for copyright infringement arising under the Copyright Act of 1976, 

as amended, Title 17, United States Code, §§ 101 et seq. (the “Copyright Act”), and pendant claims 

pursuant to the laws of the State of Illinois. 

26. The Court has original subject-matter jurisdiction over the Copyright Act claims 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. To the extent this Complaint contains claims for relief under Illinois 

law, those claims are specifically authorized to be brought in this Court under the provisions of 28 

U.S.C. §§ 1338(a) and 1338(b). 

27. This Court also has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The 

citizenship of Plaintiffs is fully diverse from that of Defendants, and the amount in controversy 

exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest. 

28. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because they are domiciled in 

the State of Illinois and incorporated under the laws of the State of Illinois. 

29. This Court has further personal jurisdiction over Defendants because they, and each 

of them, conduct business continuously and systematically in Illinois for the purpose of engaging 

in, inter alia, the manufacture and distribution of sound recordings and the licensing of musical 

compositions created and/or owned by Heard and Owens, as well as related activities within the 

State of Illinois. 

30. Defendants are further subject to personal jurisdiction based on their acts of placing 

their products into the stream of commerce with the expectation that such products will be 

delivered to and viewed by consumers within the State of Illinois and within this District. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 6 of 27 PageID #:8
7

31. Venue is proper in this Judicial District because a substantial part of the events or 

omissions giving rise to the claim occurred here. Venue is also proper in this Judicial District 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1400(a). 

ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

Background 

32. House music’s roots lie in the spontaneous combustion in a handful of Chicago clubs 

in the early 1980s, when clubs only needed one DJ. At the time, Chicago clubs were usually soundtracked by jukeboxes. “DJing” is the act of playing existing recorded music for a live audience, 

which started as early as the 1940s. By the 1970s, after the emergence of more sophisticated 

technologies to manipulate recorded music, two men from New York City ˗ Frankie Knuckles and 

Larry Levan ˗ took the art of DJing to the next level. The modern DJ’s role expanded from just 

spinning records at clubs, to that of a performer, engineer, and musician who created a seamless 

and extended mix of music for a dance party or club. 

33. Larry Levan and Frankie Knuckles were two of the first superstar DJs. They began 

their careers at two of the most important early disco clubs: the famed Continental Baths, a gay 

bathhouse located in the basement of The Ansonia Hotel in New York City, and the Gallery located 

in the SoHo neighborhood of Lower Manhattan. 

34. In 1977, after the Garage closed, Levan took up residency at the night club Paradise 

Garage, also located in SoHo. Knuckles took up residency at Chicago’s The Warehouse Club in a 

three-story former factory located at 206 South Jefferson Street in downtown Chicago. 

35. Knuckles brought Chicago a style and technique pioneered in, and previously only 

known to, New York’s disco clubs and loft parties, such as mixing and programming a set and 

using reel-to-reel tapes. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 7 of 27 PageID #:9
8

36. Word spread about The Warehouse Club; it is where the term “house” music 

originated. House music is essentially disco music with electronic drum-machine beats. 

37. As a teenager, Heard used to pass the Warehouse Club after school on his way to 

work late in the evening, wondering why there were so many people hanging out in the street. 

38. Although he had never once set foot in the club, that experience stayed with him until 

his early 20s when he began creating his own music and, by 1984, began to professionally perform 

as “Mr. Fingers.” 

39. In 1984, Heard bought his first drum machine and synthesizers and wrote and 

recorded a few songs that would become legendary — raw versions he calls “prototypes” — 

including Mystery of Love and Can You Feel It. 

40. Since that time, Heard has been a composer, recording artist, DJ, record producer, 

and musician, widely known as an important figure in Chicago’s house-music scene. Beginning in 

the 1980s, Heard was the primary creative force, leader, and lead songwriter for the influential 

house-music group, “Fingers, Inc.” He is regarded as a pioneer of deep house music, bridging the 

gap between the futurism and “posthuman tendencies” of house and the lush, soulful sound of 

disco. 

41. During the next few years, Heard also wrote, recorded, and produced Washing 

Machine which, along with his song Can You Feel It, would later be regarded as iconic housemusic anthems. 

42. Around the same time, Owens was employed in the shipping and receiving 

department of Illinois’ Evanston Hospital. There, he would find free time during his workday and, 

within the privacy of the hospital’s private bathrooms, write songs on toilet paper. Two such songs 

were Bring Down the Walls and Never No More Lonely. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 8 of 27 PageID #:10
9

43. Larry Heard met Robert Owens through a mutual friend while Owens was working 

as a DJ in Chicago’s underground dance scene. Owens had created some edits of Heard’s 

instrumental works which he gave to friends Ron Hardy and Frankie Knuckles. Shortly thereafter, 

Owens started writing lyrics for Heard’s instrumentals, including Mystery of Love, Distant Planet,

and Donnie. Shortly thereafter, Heard and Owens, along with Ron Wilson, formed the musical 

group known as “Fingers Inc.” 

44. Since the early 1980s, Owens has been, and is now, a composer, recording artist, DJ, 

record producer, and musician, best known for his collaboration with Larry Heard and Ron Wilson 

in the Chicago house group ”Fingers Inc.” Owens has also worked with many other collaborators 

in the house-music and electronica genres. 

45. Sprung from the spirit of the world of musical improvisation, Fingers Inc. raised the 

concept of house music to an art form. 

46. In 1985, Heard launched his own record label, which would eventually be called 

Alleviated Records, selling out pressings of his records from the trunk of his car. 

47. Shortly thereafter, Heard formed business relationships with two other record labels, 

Atlanta-based Jack Trax Records and Chicago-based D.J. International Records, homes for mid1980’s to 1990’s House, Acid House, Detroit Techno, and Jacking Chicago House. 

48. In or about 1985-1986, Heard also wrote, recorded, and/or produced two other songs, 

and sound recordings of those songs, entitled Beyond the Clouds (performed by Heard) and Bring 

Down the Walls (performed and co-written by Robert Owens), were similarly widely popular 

house-music tracks. 

49. In or about 1985-1986, Heard also wrote, recorded, and/or produced other musical 

compositions and sound recordings entitled Donnie (co-written with Irwin Eberhart and Harri 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 9 of 27 PageID #:11
10

Dennis), Distant Planet (co-written with Harri Dennis), Never No More Lonely (co-written with 

Robert Owens), and Bye-Bye (co-written with Robert Owens). 

50. The musical compositions entitled Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, Beyond the 

Clouds, Bring Down the Walls, Donnie, Distant Planet, and Never No More Lonely shall be 

referred to herein as the “Compositions.” 

51. The sound recordings entitled Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, Beyond the 

Clouds, Bring Down the Walls, Donnie, Distant Planet and Never No More Lonely shall be referred 

to herein as the “Recordings.”

Trax Records 

52. In 1983, after purchasing the Chicago-based vinyl record-pressing plant, Precision 

Pressing, Sherman and Jesse Saunders co-founded a record label alternatively called “Trax 

Records” or “Precision/Trax” (which has no connection to Jack Trax Records). It served as a 

primary and important distribution outlet for house music. 

53. Defendant Cain was one of the first artists signed by Trax Records. She was (and is) 

known professionally as “Screamin’ Rachael.” Cain would later be dubbed the “Queen of House 

Music” and eventually marry Sherman and become his business partner. 

54. Over the years, Sherman and/or Cain had formed various companies whose names 

included the term “Trax,” including without limitation Trax Records, Ltd. Trax Records, Inc., 

Precision/Trax Records, and Casablanca/Trax, Inc., leaving a trail of dissolved or bankrupt 

companies. 

55. Upon information and belief, in 2006, after a period of decline from the late 1990s to 

early 2000s, Cain revived the label and presently is solely in control of its business operations, and 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 10 of 27 PageID #:12
11

continued to exploit its catalogue, including the Compositions and Recordings created by Heard 

and/or Owens. 

56. Upon information and belief, Trax Records built its catalogue by taking advantage of 

the unsophisticated but creative house-music artists and songwriters by having them sign away 

their copyrights to their musical works for paltry amounts of money up front and promises of 

continued royalties throughout the life of the copyrights. 

Documents Which Purport to Grant Trax Records Rights in Heard’s Compositions. 

57. In or about 1985-1987, Heard signed four documents with “Precision/Trax Records” 

which, at the time, was not a formal legal entity, but rather a trademark utilized by Sherman. At 

the time, Heard did not have legal counsel. 

58. These documents, described in further detail below, purportedly either assigned 

Heard’s share of the copyrights in four musical compositions to Precision/Trax or granted 

Precision/Trax a mechanical license to record and release those musical compositions on 

phonograph records, for what would become Heard’s’ most popular songs and tracks, entitled Can 

You Feel It?, Washing Machine, Beyond the Clouds, and Bring Down the Walls (these musical 

compositions are herein referred to as the “Heard/Trax Compositions”). 

59. The first document is titled “Assignment of Copyright (Musical Composition),” 

which purports to assign or transfer to Precision/Trax 100% “of all publishing rights and all right, 

title and interest in and to the copyrights” then possessed by Heard in the musical compositions 

Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, and Beyond the Clouds. It is undated and appears to be signed 

by Heard but not by Sherman or anyone else on behalf of Precision/Trax. In exchange for this 

grant of copyrights, Precision/Trax promised to pay Heard a fixed amount of $3,000. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 11 of 27 PageID #:13
12

60. The second document is dated December 30, 1986, and purportedly signed by Heard 

and Sherman on behalf of Precision/Trax. It is mistitled “Assignment of Copyright (Musical 

Composition)” because it does not include any provision for the assignment, transfer, or grant of 

any copyright-ownership interest. But it does purport to grant Precision/Trax a non-exclusive 

mechanical license for the musical compositions Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, and Beyond 

the Clouds solely for the purpose of “making and selling phonograph records.” In exchange for 

this purported mechanical license, Precision/Trax promised to pay Heard a fixed amount of $3,000 

plus 15% “based on the sale of these records.” 

61. The third document, dated November 30, 1986, is purportedly signed on December 

30, 1986, by Heard and Sherman on behalf of Precision/Trax. It, too, is mistitled “Assignment of 

Copyright (Musical Composition)” because it does not include any provision for the assignment, 

transfer, or grant of any copyright-ownership interest. It does, however, purport to grant 

Precision/Trax a non-exclusive mechanical license for the musical composition Bring Down the 

Walls solely for the purpose of “making and selling phonograph records.” In exchange for this 

purported mechanical license, Precision/Trax promised to pay Heard a fixed amount of $3,000 

plus 15% “based on the sale of these records.” 

62. Critically, these first, second, and third documents (collectively, the “Precision/Trax 

Documents”) do not contain any grant of copyright ownership or any assignment or transfer of any 

copyright ownership interests in the sound recordings embodying the performances of Heard for 

Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, Beyond the Clouds, and Bring Down the Walls. 

63. The Precision/Trax Documents also lack any grant of rights to sell, license, distribute, 

or otherwise exploit any of the Recordings of Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, Beyond the 

Clouds, and Bring Down the Wall. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 12 of 27 PageID #:14
13

64. At best, the Precision/Trax Documents were ambiguous. At worst, they constituted 

unconscionable contracts of adhesion which would result in decades of revenue streams flowing 

only to Trax/Precision (or other entities formed and operated by Sherman and Cain), with Heard 

deriving virtually no economic benefit from their exploitation by Defendants. 

65. Furthermore, none of the Precision/Trax Documents refers or mentions the 

Recordings or Compositions entitled Donnie, Distant Planet, Never No More Lonely, and Distant 

Planet. 

66. To Plaintiffs’ knowledge, except for the purported limited non-exclusive grants 

referred to in the Precision/Trax Documents, as hereinabove alleged, no assignments or transfers 

of any copyright-ownership interests, or other grants, licenses, or permissions of any kind were 

ever issued to any Defendants, including without limitation, Precision/Trax, for the Compositions 

or the Recordings.

Copyright Registrations for the Compositions and the Recordings.

67. In 1986 and 1987, the Register of Copyrights issued registrations for the copyrights 

in certain Compositions in the name of Heard, alone or together with his co-authors, including 

Owens.

68. In 1986 and 1987, the Register of Copyrights also issued registrations in the name of 

“Trax Records” for the same copyrights in certain Compositions, as well as the Recordings.

69. The titles, copyright claimants, registration numbers, and a description of rights 

claimed are summarized below: 

TITLE CLAIMANT(S) - 

REGISTRANT(S) 

REG. NO. ISSUE 

DATE 

RIGHTS 

CLAIMED 

Can You Feel It Larry Heard PAu-896668 10/17/86 Music 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 13 of 27 PageID #:15
14

TITLE CLAIMANT(S) - 

REGISTRANT(S) 

REG. NO. ISSUE 

DATE 

RIGHTS 

CLAIMED 

Can You Feel It Trax Records SR-008153 2/26/87 Sound Recording & 

Music 

Washing Machine Trax Records SR-008153 2/26/87 Sound Recording & 

Music 

Washing Machine Larry Heard PAu-777775 11/5/85 Music 

Beyond The Clouds Trax Records SR-008153 2/26/87 Sound Recording & 

Music 

Beyond The Clouds Larry Heard PAu-896546 10/20/86 Music 

Bring Down the 

Walls 

Larry Heard & 

Robert Owens 

PAu-911147 11/19/86 Music 

Bring Down the 

Walls 

Trax Records SR-081157 2/26/87 Sound Recording & 

Music 

Distant Planet Larry Heard & H. 

Dennis 

PAu-1027097 11/10/87 Music 

Never No More 

Lonely 

Larry Heard, 

Robert Owens 

PAu-927655 1/27/87 Music 

Donnie Larry Heard, 

I. Eberhart & H. 

Dennis 

PAu-971117 3/2/87 Music 

70. Heard and/or Owens are original authors of each of the Recordings and the 

Compositions. 

71. Since 1986, the Recordings and the Compositions have been sold, distributed, or 

exploited either directly by Defendants, or any one of them, or licensed by Defendants many times 

over to licensees throughout the world. 

72. Furthermore, some of the Recordings have been materially edited, remixed, and 

otherwise altered without Heard and/or Owen’s knowledge or permission, including making 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 14 of 27 PageID #:16
15

derivative versions through the addition of other writers (including Cain). In fact, there are over 

one dozen versions of Can You Feel It that were released by Trax Records alone. 

73. Heard has never received a single accounting or payment from Defendants for monies 

derived from the exploitations of his musical works. 

74. Owens has never received a single accounting or payment from Defendants for 

monies derived from the exploitations of his musical works. 

75. To the extent that mechanical rights were lawfully licensed for the four Compositions 

referenced in the Precision/Trax Documents entitled Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, Beyond 

the Clouds, and Bring Down the Walls, Defendants have wholly and completely failed to pay 

Heard and/or Owen and continue to refuse to account for and pay to Heard and/or Owen any 

mechanical royalties or other income derived from Defendants’ exploitation of their works. 

76. Upon information and belief, since 1986, Defendants have generated millions of 

dollars in income stemming from their exploitation of the Compositions and Recordings. 

COUNT I 

(DECLARATORY JUDGMENT – FRAUD ON COPYRIGHT OFFICE – RECORDINGS)

(Against All Defendants) 

77. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 76, as if fully 

set forth herein. 

78. Heard is now and at all relevant times has been the owner of the copyrights in the 

Recordings entitled Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, and Beyond the Clouds, and Heard and 

Owens are now and at all relevant times have been the owners of the copyrights in the Recording 

entitled Bring Down the Walls.

79. In or about 1986 and 1987, Trax Records submitted “Form SR” applications to the 

Copyright Office when it applied for copyright registrations for the musical compositions and 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 15 of 27 PageID #:17
16

sound recordings entitled Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, Beyond the Clouds, and Bring Down 

the Walls (the “Trax Applications”). 

80. In each of the Trax Applications, in the space entitled “Author(s),” Trax Records 

correctly inserted “Larry Heard” as the “Author” of Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, and 

Beyond the Clouds and correctly inserted “Larry Heard and Robert Owens” as the “Authors” for 

the song Bring Down the Walls. 

81. But in each of the Trax Applications, Trax Records also inserted knowingly false 

information in two other spaces: first, in the space titled “Claimant(s),” Trax Records inserted “© 

℗ Trax Records”; second, in the space titled “Transfer,” Trax Records inserted words to the effect 

“by written contract” or “transfer of all rights by author” indicating that Trax Records had received 

a written copyright assignment from Heard and/or Owens for the copyrights in the Recordings of 

the same titles. 

82. By filing a combined “PA” and “SR” copyright registration application for the “sound 

recording and music” in the name of Trax Records for Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, Beyond 

the Clouds, and Bring Down the Walls, Trax Records thus falsely asserted that it owned the sound 

recording copyrights for those works. 

83. In 1986 and 1987, “Trax Records” was issued copyright registrations for the 

Compositions and Recordings entitled Washing Machine, Can You Feel It, and Beyond The 

Clouds, for which a combined registration was issued bearing registration number SR-0008153, 

as well as for Beyond The Clouds, for which a registration was issued bearing registration number 

SR-0081157 (the “Trax SR Registrations”). 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 16 of 27 PageID #:18
17

84. Upon information and belief, the “Trax Records” indicated in the Trax SR 

Registrations is Trax, Inc., Trax, Ltd., or one of the other Trax Defendants, which are now owned 

or at that time were owned and controlled by Sherman and/or Cain. 

85. Neither “Trax Records” nor any of the other Defendants was ever assigned or 

transferred any copyright ownership interests in the Recordings. Thus, they were not – at any time 

since the date of the creation of the Recordings – the copyright owner(s) thereof, including as of 

the date “Trax Records” submitted the Trax Applications. 

86. The Trax SR Registrations were procured by fraud by one or more Defendants based 

on the fraudulent representations of ownership in the Recordings. 

87. As a result, the Trax SR Registration must be invalidated since the information as to 

ownership and “transfer” were false and material. 

88. Such inaccurate information was included on the Trax Applications with knowledge 

that it was inaccurate and such inaccuracy would have caused the Register of Copyrights to refuse 

the registration had it known that it was false. 

89. The Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201, et seq., authorizes this Court to 

declare the rights and legal relations of parties to an active controversy under its jurisdiction. 

90. There is an actual, present, and existing dispute between and among the parties 

concerning the validity of the Trax SR Registrations relating to the ownership of the Recordings. 

91. The Court’s determination of the issues presented herein would be final and 

conclusive insofar as the declaratory judgment sought by Plaintiffs would fully and finally resolve 

the parties’ disputes with respect to such copyright registrations. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 17 of 27 PageID #:19
18

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully prays that the Court find in his favor and enter an 

order and judgment as follows: issuing a Declaratory Judgment finding that ALL DEFENDANTS

committed Fraud on the Copyright Office with their applications for Copyright Registrations for 

the sound recordings Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, Beyond the Clouds, and Bring Down the 

Walls, invalidating the existing Copyright Registrations for those sound recordings held in 

Defendants’ names, and entering such further relief that this Court deems just and appropriate as 

well as Plaintiffs’ costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees as provided by statute, and interest 

on its damages at the legal rate. 

COUNT II 

(WILLFUL DIRECT COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT OF THE COMPOSITIONS) 

(Against All Defendants) 

92. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 91, as if fully 

set forth herein. 

93. Heard and/or Owens are authors and owners of the copyrights in and to the 

Compositions entitled Distant Planet, Never No More Lonely and Donnie (the “Infringed 

Compositions”) for which copyright registrations were issued to them in 1987 bearing Registration 

Nos. PAu-001027097, PAu-00927655 and PAu-00971117 (the “Heard-Owens PA 

Registrations”). 

94. As the owner(s) of the copyrights in the Infringed Compositions, Heard and/or Owens 

have the exclusive rights under the Copyright Act, among other things, to produce, manufacture, 

transmit and/or distribute Phonorecords embodying them. 

95. Defendants conduct, either directly and/or through third parties, constitutes an 

infringement of Plaintiffs’ musical composition copyrights for Distant Planet, Never No More 

Lonely and Donnie. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 18 of 27 PageID #:20
19

96. Plaintiffs duly satisfied the statutory requirements regarding registration and deposit 

of the Infringed Copyrights upon which the alleged infringements are based pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 

§§ 407 and 411 as well as other statutory formalities required under the Copyright Act. 

97. At various times during the three-year period prior to the commencement of this 

action, Defendants, individually and/or collectively, have copied and mechanically reproduced the 

Infringed Compositions in full, and distributed, sold, and/or licensed both physical and digital 

copies of the Infringed Compositions, all without authorization or consent of Heard or Owen. 

98. Defendants, individually and/or collectively, were without any license or other form 

or permission, whether express or implied, to copy, reproduce, duplicate, perform, record, sell, 

use, transmit or distribute the Infringed Compositions. 

99. By reproducing, manufacturing, distributing, transmitting, and selling copies of the 

Infringed Compositions without any license or other form or permission, the Defendants have 

infringed Plaintiffs’ rights in violation of the Copyright Act.

100. The Defendants’ acts were in knowing and reckless disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights in 

and to the Infringed Compositions, and such infringements were willful as that term is defined in 

the Copyright Act. 

101. As a direct result of the Defendants’ infringement of the Infringed Compositions, 

Plaintiffs are entitled to their actual damages with respect to each of the Infringed Compositions, 

including the Defendants’ profits from such infringements, as will be proven at trial.

102. Alternatively, Plaintiffs are entitled to the maximum to statutory penalties under 17 

U.S.C. § 504, in the amount of $150,000 with respect to each timely registered work that was 

infringed, to disgorgement of Defendants’ profits, and to any and all other relief the Court deems 

just and proper under the law. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 19 of 27 PageID #:21
20

103. Plaintiffs, or either of them, are also entitled to their costs, including reasonable 

attorneys’ fees, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 505. 

104. Defendants’ conduct has caused, and unless enjoined by this Court, will continue to 

cause Plaintiffs great and irreparable injury that cannot be compensated or measured in money. 

Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law. 

105. Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §502, Plaintiffs, or either of them, are entitled to a permanent 

injunction prohibiting further infringement of the Infringed Compositions.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully prays that the Court find in his favor and enter an 

order and judgment as follows: finding ALL DEFENDANTS liable for direct infringement of 

Plaintiffs’ musical composition copyrights in Distant Planet, Never No More Lonely and Donnie, 

and (i) awarding actual damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §504(b), including Defendants' profits, in 

such amounts as may be found; or (ii) in the alternative and at Plaintiffs’ election relating to the 

infringements of Distant Planet, Never No More Lonely and Donnie, statutory damages pursuant 

to 17 U.S.C. § 504(c) in the maximum amount allowed by law, (iii) awarding Plaintiffs the costs 

of this action, including reasonable attorney’s fees, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §505 relating to the 

infringements of Distant Planet, Never No More Lonely and Donnie, and (iv) entering such further 

relief that this Court deems just and appropriate, as well as Plaintiffs’ costs, including reasonable 

attorney’s fees as provided by statute, and interest on its damages at the legal rate.

COUNT III 

CONTRIBUTORY COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT 

(Against Cain) 

106. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 105, as if fully 

set forth herein. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 20 of 27 PageID #:22
21

107. At various times during the three-year period prior to the commencement of this 

action, the Infringed Compositions have been and continue to be illegally reproduced, published, 

licensed and/or sold and distributed without Plaintiffs’ authorization in violation of 17 U.S.C. § 

101 et seq. 

108. Plaintiffs, or either of them, own the copyrights in the Infringed Compositions which 

have been infringed by the Defendants as hereinabove alleged. 

109. Cain is secondarily liable under the Copyright Act for such infringing acts, including 

for the direct infringement by of Plaintiffs’ exclusive rights by Precision/Trax, Trax, Inc. and Trax, 

Ltd. 

110. Cain induced, caused, participated in, aided and abetted and/or materially contributed 

to the infringing conduct by Precision/Trax, Trax, Inc. and Trax, Ltd. 

111. Cain is liable as a contributory copyright infringer. Cain had actual and constructive 

knowledge of the infringing activity that occurred and is occurring with respect to the Infringed 

Compositions, and induced, caused, participated in, aided and abetted and/or materially 

contributed to such infringing conduct by Precision/Trax, Trax, Inc. and Trax, Ltd. 

112. The foregoing acts of infringement by Cain have been willful, intentional, and 

purposeful, in disregard of and indifference to Plaintiffs’ rights. 

113. As a direct and proximate result of such infringement of Plaintiffs’ copyrights and 

exclusive rights under copyright, Plaintiffs, or either of them, are entitled to maximum statutory 

damages, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504(c), in the amount of $150,000 with respect to each of the 

Infringed Compositions or such other amounts as may be proper. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 21 of 27 PageID #:23
22

114. Alternatively, at Plaintiffs’ election, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504(b), Plaintiffs, or 

either of them, are entitled to actual damages with respect to each of the Infringed Compositions, 

including Cain’s profits from such infringements, in such amounts as will be proven at trial. 

115. Defendant's conduct is causing and, unless enjoined by this Court, will continue to 

cause Plaintiffs great and irreparable injury that cannot fully be compensated for or measured in 

money. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully prays that the Court find in his favor and enter an 

order and judgment as follows: finding DEFENDANT RACHAEL CAIN liable for contributory 

infringement of Plaintiffs’ musical composition copyrights in Distant Planet, Never No More 

Lonely and Donnie, and (i) awarding actual damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §504(b), including any 

profits of Defendant Rachel Cain, in such amounts as may be found; or (ii) in the alternative and 

at Plaintiffs’ election relating to the infringements of Distant Planet, Never No More Lonely and 

Donnie, awarding statutory damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504(c) in the maximum amount 

allowed by law; (iii) relating to the infringements of Distant Planet, Never No More Lonely and 

Donnie, awarding Plaintiffs the costs of this action, including reasonable attorney’s fees, pursuant 

to 17 U.S.C. §505; and (iv) entering such further relief that this Court deems just and appropriate, 

as well as Plaintiffs’ costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees as provided by statute, and interest 

on its damages at the legal rate. 

COUNT IV 

(BREACH OF CONTRACT) 

(By Heard Against Precision/Trax Records and Trax Records, Inc.) 

116. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 115, as if fully 

set forth herein. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 22 of 27 PageID #:24
23

117. Since in or about 1986, Precision/Trax Records and/or its successors-in-interest 

and/or persons or entities acting through them or under their authority (including without limitation 

Cain, Trax Ltd. and Trax, Inc.) have continued to exploit the Compositions and Recordings entitled 

Can You Feel It, Washing Machine, Beyond the Clouds and Bring Down the Walls (hereinafter the 

“Heard Works”), as to which Precision/Trax was issued purported mechanical licenses, including 

without limitation, through the worldwide sale, license and/or distribution of those works in both 

physical formats as well as through digital service providers such as Spotify, iTunes, Band Camp, 

Soundcloud and YouTube. 

118. Defendants have failed and refused to pay and account to Heard for their exploitation 

of the Heard Works despite the contractual obligations to do so. 

119. As a result, Heard has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial but 

believed to be greater than $1,000,000. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully prays that the Court find in his favor and enter an 

order and judgment as follows: awarding Heard compensatory damages against DEFENDANTS 

PRECISION/TRAX RECORDS AND TRAX RECORDS, INC. for the material breach of contract in an 

amount to be proved at trial, but not less than $1,000,000, and entering such further relief this 

Court deems just and appropriate, as well as Plaintiffs’ costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees 

as provided by statute, and interest on its damages at the legal rate. 

COUNT V 

(BREACH OF THE WARRANTY OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING) 

(Against Precision/Trax Records and Trax Records, Inc.) 

120. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 119, as if fully 

set forth herein. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 23 of 27 PageID #:25
24

121. Defendants have continued to exploit the Heard Works including, through the 

worldwide sale, license and/or distribution of those works in both physical formats as well as 

through digital service providers such as Spotify, iTunes, Band Camp, Soundcloud and YouTube. 

122. Defendants have failed and refused to pay or account for the exploitation of the Heard 

Works despite the contractual obligations to do so. 

123. Defendants have received substantial income from the exploitation of the Heard 

Works and have failed and refused to pay Heard his rightful share of that income. 

124. The Defendants have exercised any contractual rights they, or either of them, may 

have with respect to the Heard Works, arbitrarily, capriciously, or in a manner inconsistent with 

the reasonable expectation of the parties. 

125. As a result, thereof, the Defendants breached the implied warranty of good faith and 

fair dealing that adheres to every contract as a matter of law.

126. As a result, thereof, Heard has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial 

but believed to be greater than $1,000,000. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully prays that the Court find in his favor and enter an 

order and judgment as follows: awarding Heard compensatory damages against ALL DEFENDANTS 

for the breach of the implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing in an amount to be proved at 

trial, but not less than $1,000,000, entering such further relief that this Court deems just and 

appropriate. 

COUNT VI 

(UNJUST ENRICHMENT) 

(Against All Defendants) 

127. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 126, as if fully 

set forth herein. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 24 of 27 PageID #:26
25

128. Defendants have continued to exploit the Heard Works including, through the 

worldwide sale, license and/or distribution of those works in both physical formats as well as 

through digital service providers such as Spotify, iTunes, Band Camp, Soundcloud and YouTube. 

129. Defendants have received substantial income from the exploitation of the Heard 

Works and have failed and refused to pay Plaintiffs their rightful share of that income. 

130. Defendants have received money which belongs to Plaintiffs under circumstances 

whereby in equity and good conscience they ought not keep it. 

131. As a result, thereof, the Defendants have been unjustly enriched by its receipt and 

retainer of money otherwise belonging to Plaintiffs in an amount to be determined at trial but 

believed to be in excess of $1,000,000. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully prays that the Court find in his favor and enter an 

order and judgment as follows: awarding Plaintiffs damages against ALL DEFENDANTS for unjust 

enrichment in an amount to be proved at trial, but not less than $1,000,000, and entering such 

further relief that this Court deems just and appropriate. 

COUNT VII 

(CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST) 

(By Heard Against All Defendants) 

132. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 131, as if fully 

set forth herein. 

133. Defendants have continued to exploit the Heard Works including, through the 

worldwide sale, license and/or distribution of those works in both physical formats as well as 

through digital service providers such as Spotify, iTunes, Band Camp, Soundcloud and YouTube. 

134. Defendants have failed and refused to pay or account for the exploitation of the Heard 

Works despite the contractual obligations to do so and despite Heard’s demands that they do so. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 25 of 27 PageID #:27
26

135. Defendants have received substantial income from the exploitation of the Heard 

Works and have failed and refused to pay Heard his rightful share of that income. 

136. Defendants have received money which belongs to Heard under circumstances 

whereby in equity and good conscience they ought not keep it. 

137. As a result, Defendants hold money otherwise belonging to Heard in constructive 

trust in an amount to be determined at trial but believed to be greater than $1,000,000. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully prays that the Court find in his favor and enter an 

order and judgment as follows: against ALL DEFENDANTS, imposing a constructive trust in an 

amount to be proved at trial, but not less than $1,000,000, and entering such further relief that this 

Court deems just and appropriate. 

COUNT VIII 

(VIOLATIONS OF THE ILLINOIS CONSUMER FRAUD ACT) 

(By Plaintiffs Against All Defendants) 

138. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 137 as if fully 

set forth herein. 

139. Defendants have committed deceptive acts or practices, including, but not limited to, 

selling and distributing to the public from their offices in Chicago, Illinois, physical recordings 

and digital distribution (through streaming services or otherwise) of the Recordings under the 

representation that they owned and controlled such works. 

140. Such acts or practices were knowingly false, deceptive and misleading. 

141. Defendants intended that the public rely on these deceptions in the purchasing of 

those physical records and/or licensing of such works via music streaming services. 

142. Defendants’ deceptive acts or practices occurred in a course of conduct involving 

trade or commerce, specifically the wrongful commercial exploitation of the Recordings. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 26 of 27 PageID #:28
27

143. Defendants’ deceptive acts or practices have proximately caused Plaintiffs’ actual 

damages in an amount to be determined at trial but believed to be greater than $1,000,000. 

144. In addition to his actual damages, Plaintiffs are entitled under the statute to reasonable 

attorney’s fees and costs. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully prays that the Court find in his favor and enter an 

order and judgment as follows: against ALL DEFENDANTS a judgment that the Defendants’ conduct 

violates the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act and imposing damages in an amount to be proved at trial, 

but not less than $1,000,000, and entering such further relief as this Court deems just and 

appropriate, as well as Plaintiffs’ costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees as provided by statute, 

and interest on its damages at the legal rate.

JURY DEMAND 

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b), Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury of all issues which are 

so triable. 

Dated: June 23, 2020 

By: /s/Robert S. Meloni 

 Robert S. Meloni, pro hac vice forthcoming 

 Thomas P. McCaffrey, pro hac vice forthcoming 

MELONI & McCAFFREY, a Professional Corporation 

3 Columbus Circle – 15th Floor 

New York, New York 10019 

Tel: (212) 520-6090 

By: /s/ Christopher M Heintskill (ARDC No. 6272391) 

LEVENFELD PEARLSTEIN, LLC 

2 North LaSalle, 13th Floor 

Chicago, IL 60602 

Tel: (312) 346-8380 

cheintskill@lplegal.com 

Appearing as Local Counsel 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Larry Heard and Robert Owens 

Case: 1:20-cv-03678 Document #: 2 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 27 of 27 PageID #:29