Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/117260813/Katz-v-Google
Timestamp: 2016-10-22 06:52:10
Document Index: 110452288

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1331', '§48', '§48', '§48', '§48', '§1391', '§ 104', '§ 411', '§ 501', '§ 411', '§ 501', '§ 411']

BrowseBrowseInterestsBiography & MemoirBusiness & LeadershipFiction & LiteraturePolitics & EconomyHealth & WellnessSociety & CultureHappiness & Self-HelpMystery, Thriller & CrimeHistoryYoung AdultBrowse byBooksAudiobooksComicsSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoinBooksAudiobooksComicsSheet MusicCase 1:12-cv-22211-JLK Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/12/2012 Page 1 of 7IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No: ____________________________ RAANAN KATZ, Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE INC., a Delaware corporation, and IRINA CHEVALDINA, an individual, Defendants. ________________________________________/ COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES Plaintiff, Raanan Katz, an individual (“Katz”), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby sues Google Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Google”) and Irina Chevaldina, an individual (“Chevaldina”) (Google and Chevaldina will be collectively referred to herein as “Defendants”), and alleges: Nature of Suit 1. This is an action seeking injunctive relief and damages arising from Defendants’ The Complaint alleges: direct copyright
unauthorized use of Katz’s copyrighted image.
infringement (Count I) and contributory copyright infringement (Count II). Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Venue and Personal Jurisdiction 2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the federal copyright cause of
action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338. 3. Defendant Google is subject to personal jurisdiction of this Court under Fla. Stat.
§§48.193(1)(a), 48.193(1)(b), and §48.193(2) because it: (i) operates, conducts, engages in, or carries on a business or business venture in Florida or has an office or agency in Florida; (ii)
Case 1:12-cv-22211-JLK Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/12/2012 Page 2 of 7
committed the tortious conduct alleged herein in the State of Florida; and (iii) engages in substantial and not isolated business activity in the State of Florida. 4. Defendant Chevaldina is subject to personal jurisdiction of this Court because she
resides in Florida. Chevaldina is also subject to personal jurisdiction of this Court under Fla. Stat. §§48.193(1)(a), 48.193(1)(b), and §48.193(2) because she: (i) operates, conducts, engages in, or carries on a business or business venture in Florida or has an office or agency in Florida; (ii) committed the tortious conduct alleged herein in the State of Florida; and (iii) engages in substantial and not isolated business activity in the State of Florida. 5. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. §1391(b) and (c) because: (i)
each Defendant resides or can be found in this District and is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District; and (ii) a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred in this District. The Parties 6. 7. Plaintiff Katz is an individual who resides in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Defendant Google Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
the Delaware, with its principal place of business at 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043. 8. Upon information and belief, Defendant Chevaldina is an individual residing at
19508 East Country Club Drive, Aventura, Florida 33180. Facts 9. Katz is the owner, by assignment, of all right, title and interest, including all
copyright rights, in and to the following image (the “Image”), which has been partially distorted due to its unflattering nature:
Case 1:12-cv-22211-JLK Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/12/2012 Page 3 of 7
The Image was photographed and first published in Israel on or about February
22, 2011, and is considered a foreign work, protected in the United States under 17 U.S.C. § 104(b)(2) through International Treaties. Registration of the Image with the copyright office is not a prerequisite to filing a claim for copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 411(a) because the Image is not a United States work. Defendants’ Conduct 11. Defendant Chevaldina operates various web sites on the Internet under the names
“Always True,” “alwaytrue” and others, which display unauthorized copies of the Image. 12. Defendant Chevaldina uses Google’s blogspot and blogger platforms to host some
of the web sites. 13. An agent of Katz submitted a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) take-
down request to Google for the Image on May 24, 2012. Google responded to the DMCA notice indicating that it would not take such action.
Case 1:12-cv-22211-JLK Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/12/2012 Page 4 of 7
Counsel for Katz sent another DMCA take-down notice to Google on June 4,
2012 demanding that each copy of the Image be removed from its servers. Google again responded to the DMCA notice indicating that it would not take such action. Conditions Precedent and Attorneys’ Fees 15. All conditions precedent to the bringing and maintenance of this action have been
performed, waived, or have occurred. 16. Katz has retained the undersigned counsel to represent him in this action and is
obligated to pay them a reasonable fee for their services. COUNT I DIRECT COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT UNDER 17 U.S.C. § 501 The allegations contained in paragraphs 1-16 above are hereby realleged as if fully set forth herein. 17. As previously alleged, registration of the Image with the copyright office is not a
prerequisite to filing a claim for copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 411(a) because the Image is not a United States work. 18. Without Katz’s authorization or approval, Chevaldina knowingly, intentionally
and willfully copied and publicly displayed the Image in violation of Katz’s exclusive rights in the Image. 19. of his rights. 20. Upon information and belief, as a result of its conduct, Chevaldina has realized Katz has been and will likely continue to be damaged by Chevaldina’s violation
and continues to realize profits or other benefits rightly belonging to Katz. WHEREFORE, Katz respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment against Chevaldina:
Case 1:12-cv-22211-JLK Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/12/2012 Page 5 of 7
Preliminarily and permanently enjoining Chevaldina from copying, displaying or otherwise using the Image, or any other images in which Katz owns the copyright;
Requiring Chevaldina to destroy any images, including electronic versions thereof, in which Katz owns the copyright that remain in her possession, custody or control;
Awarding Katz his actual damages and any profits of Chevaldina; Requiring Chevaldina to file a notice detailing all of the actions taken to comply with the Court’s judgment; and
Granting Katz any other and further relief this Court deems just and proper.
COUNT II CONTRIBUTORY COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT UNDER 17 U.S.C. § 501
The allegations contained in paragraphs 1-16 above are hereby realleged as if fully set forth herein. 21. As previously alleged, registration of the Image with the copyright office is not a
prerequisite to filing a claim for copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 411(a) because the Image is not a United States work. 22. Defendant Google materially contributes to Chevaldina’s direct copyright
infringement by hosting Chevaldina’s web sites and numerous copies of the infringing Image on its servers through its blogspot service. 23. Google knowingly, intentionally and willfully refused to remove the Image from
its servers after being put on notice of Chevaldina’s infringement by DMCA take-down notices sent on behalf of Katz and is a contributory infringer who is not protected by the DMCA safeharbor.
Case 1:12-cv-22211-JLK Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/12/2012 Page 6 of 7
24. 25. rights. 26.
Katz has not authorized or approved the use of the Image. Katz has been and will likely continue to be damaged by Google’s violation of its
Upon information and belief, as a result of its conduct, Google has realized and
continues to realize profits or other benefits rightly belonging to Katz. WHEREFORE, Katz respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment against Google: (A) Preliminarily and permanently enjoining Google from copying, displaying or
otherwise using the Image; (B) Requiring Google to destroy the Image, including electronic versions thereof,
which remain in its possession, custody or control; (C) (D) Awarding Katz his actual damages and any profits of Google; Requiring Google to file a notice detailing all of the actions taken to comply with
the Court’s judgment; and (E) Granting Katz any other and further relief this Court deems just and proper.
Dated: June 12, 2012
Respectfully submitted, KLUGER KAPLAN SILVERMAN KATZEN & LEVINE, P.L. Co-Counsel for Raanan Katz 201 South Biscayne Blvd., 17th Floor Miami, Florida 33131 Telephone: 305-379-9000 Facsimile: 305- 379-3428 By: /s Alan J. Kluger Alan J. Kluger Florida Bar No. 200379 Email: akluger@ klugerkaplan.com Todd A. Levine Florida Bar No. 899119
Case 1:12-cv-22211-JLK Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/12/2012 Page 7 of 7
Email: tlevine@klugerkaplan.com And PERETZ CHESAL & HERRMANN, P.L. Co-Counsel for Raanan Katz 201 South Biscayne Blvd., Suite 1750 Miami, Florida 33131 Telephone: 305-341-3000 Facsimile: 305-371-6807 By: /s Michael B. Chesal Michael B. Chesal Florida Bar No. 775398 Email: mchesal@pch-iplaw.com
More From This UserLawsuitGrimes LienLeak Police ReportRose ECF 281Rose Ecf 285Rose ECF 283Baute DeclarationDEFENDANT DERRICK ROSE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 2Order Re- Motions in LimineRose LAPD Letter FilingRose LAPD Letter Filing Rose Ruling Jane Doe NameLandon Rice Text MessagesRams RulingDerrick Rose Memo in Support of Motion to Preclude Plaintiff's Use of PseudonymDerrick Rose Notice of Plaintiff Pretrial Media InterviewsJane Doe Voir DireDerrick Rose Voir DireRose - Jane Doe Text MessagesDerrick Rose - Jane Doe Pseudonym RulingAnger Management vs Perpetrator Intervention ProgramsJPP Opposition To Motion To Dismiss TweetsClass ActionJPP Opposition To Motion To DismissOrder Denying Motion To Dismiss
Katz v. Google by Deadspin112K viewsEmbedDownloadDescriptionDerp lawsuitDerp lawsuitInterests: United StatesRead on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.Copyright: Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)Download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentShow moreShow less
RelatedUSM Emailsby DeadspinRockne FOIAby Tom LeyPerkins Autopsyby Tom LeyTempo Music, Inc., Robbins Music Corporation, Remick Music Corporation, and Mills Music, Inc. v. James D. Myers, 407 F.2d 503, 4th Cir. (1969)by Scribd Government DocsHow Copyright Law is Being Misused to Remove Material From the Internetby eliforuTest Powerpoint fileby thezoneGershwin Publishing Corporation v. Columbia Artists Management, Inc., and Community Concerts, Inc., 443 F.2d 1159, 2d Cir. (1971)by Scribd Government DocsInternet Archive Suppl. Memo of Amicus Curae GBSv2by Peter BrantleyCopy Rightby Arathy VikramCease and Desistby Sasha SolovievFeist Publicationby av783Cease and Desist Demandby Jeffrey LuCopyright Outline Kmackby Adom PolkCopyright Lawby Rames KhanCambridge University Press v. Becker (N.D. Ga. Sept. 30, 2010)by Andrew Pequignotmpaa-motby torrentfreakNesson Amicus Briefby Ben SheffnerAGENCE FRANCE PRESSE v. GOOGLE INC. - Document No. 31by Justia.comgov.uscourts.ilnd.250791.229.0by Robert RenlingShelter Capitalby concerned-citizenBrandon S. Sand Settlement Demand Letterby ExtortionLetterInfo.com2 Copyrightby duaxetrongmuaMercado v. Indio Products - 9th Circuit trade dress.pdfby Mark H. JaffeUS Copyright Office: 131by copyrightGetty Images Attorney General Complaint 5by ExtortionLetterInfo.comMPAA Amicus briefby psweetingUS Copyright Office: russellby copyright2012-03-06-RushNoticeofCopyrightInfringementLimbaugh20120306by Benjamin FreedSimilar to Katz v. GoogleUSM EmailsRockne FOIAPerkins AutopsyTempo Music, Inc., Robbins Music Corporation, Remick Music Corporation, and Mills Music, Inc. v. James D. Myers, 407 F.2d 503, 4th Cir. (1969)How Copyright Law is Being Misused to Remove Material From the InternetTest Powerpoint fileGershwin Publishing Corporation v. Columbia Artists Management, Inc., and Community Concerts, Inc., 443 F.2d 1159, 2d Cir. (1971)Internet Archive Suppl. Memo of Amicus Curae GBSv2Copy RightCease and DesistFeist PublicationCease and Desist DemandCopyright Outline KmackCopyright LawCambridge University Press v. Becker (N.D. Ga. Sept. 30, 2010)mpaa-motNesson Amicus BriefAGENCE FRANCE PRESSE v. GOOGLE INC. - Document No. 31gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791.229.0Shelter CapitalBrandon S. Sand Settlement Demand Letter2 CopyrightMercado v. Indio Products - 9th Circuit trade dress.pdfUS Copyright OfficeGetty Images Attorney General Complaint 5MPAA Amicus briefUS Copyright Office2012-03-06-RushNoticeofCopyrightInfringementLimbaugh20120306PhilCOPYRIGHT.pptx1.Copyright IGZ Tut 1 2014