Source: http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/arizona/azdce/2:2012cv00130/671634/1/
Timestamp: 2014-10-31 13:30:43
Document Index: 593661264

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 101', '§ 1051', '§ 1121', '§\n101', '§ 1331', '§ 1338', '§ 1367', '§ 1391', '§ 1400', '§ 106', '§\n106', '§ 106', '§\n504', '§ 504', '§ 505', '§ 502', '§ 1125', '§ 1114', '§ 504', '§1117', '§ 504', '§ 1117', '§\n504', '§1117', '§ 502', '§1116']

COMPLAINT for Xcentric Ventures LLC v. Mediolex Limited et al :: Justia Dockets & Filings Justia.com
> Xcentric Ventures LLC v. Mediolex Limited et al
Xcentric Ventures LLC v. Mediolex Limited et al
COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $350.00, receipt number PHX 0970-6300413, filed by Xcentric Ventures LLC (submitted by Maria Speth). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(REK)
Maria Crimi Speth (012574)
3200 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2000
mcs@jaburgwilk.com
David S. Gingras, #021097
3941 E. Chandler Blvd., #106-243
Tel.: (480) 668-3623
Fax: (480) 248-3196
David@GingrasLaw.com
XCENTRIC VENTURES, L.L.C.,
MEDIOLEX LTD., a foreign corporation
d/b/a/ COMPLAINTSBOARD.COM;
COMPLAINTSBOARD.COM, an
unregistered business entity; MARK
SCHULTZ, an individual,
For its Complaint, Plaintiff Xcentric Ventures, L.L.C. alleges as follows:
This is a civil action seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief for
various acts of copyright infringement under the copyright laws of the United States (17
U.S.C. § 101 et seq.) and for various acts of trademark infringement in violation of the
Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051, et seq., and related state law claims.
This Court has jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. § 1121 (trademark); 17 U.S.C. §
101 et seq. (copyright); 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question); and 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a)
10297-44/MCS/DAG/951598_v1
(copyright). This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over state and common law claims
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
Venue in this District is proper under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c), and/or
28 U.S.C. § 1400(a).
occurred in this District, and certain corporate defendants are subject to personal
A substantial part of the acts of infringement complained of
Personal jurisdiction in this District is proper because each defendant,
engaged in acts of copyright infringement within the District of Arizona, and/or
intentionally directed tortious conduct at Plaintiff knowing such conduct would cause
harm within this District.
Plaintiff XCENTRIC VENTURES, L.L.C. (“Plaintiff”) is an Arizona
limited liability company with its principal place of business in Tempe, Arizona and is a
citizen of the State of Arizona.
Plaintiff is the operator of the website located at www.RipoffReport.com
(the “Ripoff Report”). The Ripoff Report is widely used by consumers, and works closely
with government agencies, attorneys general, federal, state, and local law enforcement,
and the news media to help report, identify and prevent consumer fraud and similar
MEDIOLEX
(“Mediolex”) is a corporation of unknown origin which has registered the domain name
www.complaintsboard.com, and which caused the events herein described to occur with
knowledge that they would cause harm within the State of Arizona. Upon information
and belief, Mediolex also has engaged in continuous, systematic and substantial contacts
with the State of Arizona sufficient to confer general and specific personal jurisdiction
over it in this District.
Defendant COMPLAINTSBOARD.COM is an entity of unknown origin
which the website WWW.COMPLAINTSBOARD.COM claims to be operated by, and
which caused the events herein described to occur with knowledge that they would cause
harm within the State of Arizona. Upon information and belief, complaintsboard.com
also has engaged in continuous, systematic and substantial contacts with the State of
Arizona sufficient to confer general and specific personal jurisdiction over it in this
Upon information and belief, Defendant MARK SCHULTZ is a resident of
the country of Latvia, and claims to be a “part owner” of the website
COMPLAINTSBOARD.COM, and caused the events herein described to occur with
and belief, Mr. Schultz also has engaged in continuous, systematic and substantial
contacts with the State of Arizona sufficient to confer general and specific personal
jurisdiction over it in this District.
The Ripoff Report is, among other things, a website upon which consumers
may post complaints. Any member of the public with access to a computer and an Internet
connection may use the Ripoff Report website to create and publish complaints about
companies or individuals who they believe have wronged them in some manner.
The Ripoff Report was launched in 1998 and was the only website that
provided consumers with a forum to post complaints about companies
When a user posts a complaint on Ripoff Report, the user electronically
signs an agreement that grants to Xcentric an irrevocable, perpetual exclusive license to
use, copy, perform, display and distribute the content posted.
Complaints published on the Ripoff Report are automatically indexed by
numerous search engines such as Google and such complaints often rank very high in
Plaintiff is the owner of various copyrights relating to content appearing on
the Ripoff Report website.
Plaintiff is the owner of the federal copyright issued by the United States
Copyright Office Certificate of Registration No. TXu1-574-438 entitled “Rip-off Report
Content” dated March 25, 2008.
Plaintiff is the owner of a federal copyright issued by the United States
Copyright Office Certificate of Registration No. TXu1-371-920 entitled “Group Database
Registration for Automated Database Entitled ‘Rip-off Report Database.’ Unpublished
updates from March 5, 2008 – May 5, 2008” dated May 20, 2008.
Plaintiff is the owner of the registered trademark RIPOFF REPORT, United
States Patent & Trademark Office Registration Number 2958949.
Plaintiff is the owner of the pending trademark registration for
CORPORATE ADVOCACY PROGRAM, United States Patent & Trademark Office
Serial Number 85460244.
Plaintiff is the owner of the registered trademark DON’T LET THEM GET
AWAY WITH IT, United States Patent & Trademark Office Registration Number
2824390.
Plaintiff is the owner of the common law trademark DON’T LET THEM
GET AWAY WITH IT, LET THE TRUTH BE KNOWN.
On or about December 13, 2006, June 23, 2007, August 18, 2007,
September 1, 2007, September 5, 2007, October 1, 2007, October 5, 2007, October 9,
2007, October 26, 2007 and November 1, 2007, Plaintiff filed fictitious report on its own
website about a fictitious business called Leanne’s Mobile Groom and Board in Fort
Smith, Arkansas (the “Leanne’s Posting”). The Leanne’s Posting was made for the
purpose of tracking activities of competitors and other businesses with an unlawful intent.
There never is and never was a real business called Leanne’s Mobile Groom and Board.
On or about June 22, 2006 Defendants or their predecessor purchased the
domain name complaintsboard.com and shortly thereafter launched a website located at
complaintsboard.com.
The complaintsboard.com website was launched by copying large amounts
of content from the Ripoff Report website.
The website www.complaintsboard.com (the “ComplaintsBoard site”)
generally purports to be a forum for consumers to post and review complaints about
businesses and bad business practices, among other things.
The ComplaintsBoard site copied the concept, style, and the content of the
Ripoff Report site.
On or around December 17, 2008, Plaintiff initiated a lawsuit in this Court
similar to the present one against COMPLAINTSBOARD.COM for copyright
infringement. The case was captioned Xcentric Ventures, LLC v. Elizabeth Arden, Case
No. 2:08-cv-02299-HRH (the “2008 Case”).
In the 2008 Case, the defendants were found to have systematically stolen
copyright-protected content from the Ripoff Report website and published it on the
Complaintsboard.com website for the benefit of Defendants. On October 22, 2009, the
Court entered Judgment against defendants in the 2008 Case, awarding both monetary
damages arising from defendant’s infringement of Plaintiff’s copyright, as well as a
permanent injunction. See Judgment, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.
Plaintiff has taken numerous affirmative steps to ensure that the
Complaintsboard.com website comply with the Permanent Injunction and cease any
further copying from the Ripoff Report website.
Since the judgment was entered in the 2008 Case, Defendants have
continued engaging in conduct that violates Plaintiff’s rights.
Complaintsboard.com website.
In many cases, the user-generated content is content that has been
exclusively licensed to Xcentric Ventures, LLC.
When consumers post content on Ripoff Report, they enter into an exclusive
license with Xcentric prohibiting them from posting the same content on other websites.
Defendants encourage and permit consumers to post content that has been
exclusively licensed to Xcentric.
Despite knowledge and demand, Defendants continue to permit the posting
of content that is exclusively licensed to Xcentric.
In addition, Defendants have used Xcentric’s trademarks on the
Complaintsboard.com website which has caused and is likely to cause consumer
Defendants display the trademark “DON’T LET THEM GET AWAY
WITH IT” on the Complaintsboard.com website.
PROGRAM on the Complaintsboard.com website.
The ComplaintsBoard site’s use of Xcentric’s trademarks is likely to cause
confusion as to source or sponsorship.
Defendants’ unlawful use of Plaintiff’s trademarks has caused substantial
actual confusion among consumers who have been misled into believing that Plaintiff is
the owner and/or operator of the ComplaintsBoard site when, in fact, this is not true.
As a result of the ongoing and pervasive copying of Xcentric’s copyright
protected materials and as a result of the ongoing use of Xcentric’s trademark on to the
ComplaintsBoard site by Defendants, the web traffic to the Ripoff Report website has
Sometime prior to January 19, 2011, Defendants posted the following
statement on Complaintsboard.com: “Leanne's Mobile Groom And Board Are you also a
victim of the Leanne's Mobile Groom And Board? Submit a complaint to help other
consumers to be educated and don't let them get away with it!”
Defendants also posted the following statement on Complaintsboard.com:
“In case you have experienced any problems with Leanne’s Mobile Groom and Board
please report immediately by filling [sic] a Complaint Form.”
Defendants posted the solicitations of complaints about Leanne’s Mobile
Groom and Board for the sole reason of diverting traffic from the Ripoff Report website
to the Complaintsboard.com website.
(Infringement of Copyright – 17 U.S.C. §§ 106.501(a))
Plaintiff incorporates herein by this reference each and every allegation set
forth in this Complaint as though fully set forth below.
Defendants have violated Plaintiff’s exclusive rights under 17 U.S.C. §
106(3) (distribution) by distributing Plaintiff’s works without permission
Defendants have violated Plaintiff’s rights under 17 U.S.C. § 106(5)
(display) by publicly displaying Plaintiff’s works without permission.
Plaintiff is informed and believes that the foregoing acts of infringement
have been willful, intentional, and in disregard of and with indifference to the rights of
Defendants’ infringing activities were not authorized by Plaintiff and were
performed without Plaintiff’s knowledge, consent, or permission.
Defendants’ infringing activities were and are done for Defendants’
Defendants’ infringing activities have caused Plaintiff to incur actual
As the result of Defendants’ infringement of Plaintiff’s exclusive rights,
Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendants its actual damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §
504(b) or statutory damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504(c), whichever is greater.
Plaintiff further is entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 505.
Furthermore, the conduct of each Defendant is causing and, unless enjoined
and restrained by this Court, will continue to cause Plaintiff great and irreparable injury
that cannot fully be compensated or measured in money.
Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §§ 502(a) and 503, Plaintiff is entitled to preliminary
and permanent injunctive relief prohibiting each Defendant from further infringing
Plaintiff’s copyrighted works.
(Contributory Infringement of Copyright)
As set forth more fully herein, Defendants, with knowledge of the infringing
activity, induced, caused or materially contributed to copyright violations by third parties
who posted content exclusively licensed to Plaintiff on the Complaintsboards.com
As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff suffered
harm and damages.
(Trademark Infringement 15 U.S.C. §§ 1125)
Plaintiffs did not give Defendants consent to use its common law
Defendants’ use of Plaintiff’s common law trademarks is likely to cause
confusion or to deceive and has caused confusion as to the source or origin of the services.
Defendants’ use of Plaintiff’s common law trademarks implies sponsorship
or affiliation between Plaintiff and Defendants.
Defendants’ use of Plaintiff’s common law trademarks is a misappropriation
of the goodwill that Plaintiff has accumulated in its trademarks.
Defendants have infringed upon Plaintiff’s common law trademarks through
all of the acts previously alleged in this Complaint.
Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of Defendants’ infringing activities
Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief to prohibit Defendant from
committing any further or additional infringement.
Plaintiff is entitled to recover statutory damages and also general, special,
consequential, and incidental damages, including but not limited to lost profits and cost of
corrective advertising, and injunctive relief.
Defendants’ acts were committed in bad faith entitling Plaintiff to a
recovery of treble damages and attorneys’ fees.
(Trademark Infringement 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114)
Plaintiffs did not give Defendants consent to use its registered trademarks.
Defendants’ use of Plaintiff’s registered trademarks is likely to cause
Defendants’ use of Plaintiff’s registered trademarks implies sponsorship or
affiliation between Plaintiff and Defendants.
Defendants’ use of Plaintiff’s registered trademarks is a misappropriation of
the goodwill that Plaintiff has accumulated in its trademarks.
Defendants have infringed upon Plaintiff’s registered trademarks through all
of the acts previously alleged in this Complaint.
forth in all paragraphs as though fully set forth below.
The acts of Defendant amount to an unauthorized interference with the
normal operation of Plaintiff’s business in order to divert a material portion of the profit,
with special advantage to Defendant in the competition because of the fact that Defendant
has avoided the time and expense of building its own content and generating its own
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unfair competition, Plaintiff
has suffered damages.
Defendants’ unfair competition has caused, and continues to cause,
Plaintiff to sustain irreparable damages, loss and injury, for which Plaintiff has no
Plaintiff is entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctive relief
enjoining Defendants from further unfair competition with Plaintiff.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in its favor and against
each Defendant as follows:
For Plaintiff’s actual damages and Defendants’ profits, or statutory
damages, as Plaintiff may elect, for infringement of each copyrighted work pursuant to 17
U.S.C. § 504;
§1117;
For Plaintiff’s costs in this action pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504 and/or 15
U.S.C. § 1117(a);
For Plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §
504 and 15 U.S.C. §1117; and
For injunctive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §§ 502(a) and 503 and 15 U.S.C.
§1116;
For Plaintiff’s damages for trademark infringement pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
DATED this 20th day of January, 2012.
s/Maria Crimi Speth