update January 31, 2015 – this week the Court dismissed a Plaintiff motion to alter the below judgement. The Plaintiff argued that there was a convention that ‘five figure judgements’ were proper in piracy cases. The Court disagreed noting that absent evidence of ‘anything extraordinary’ the a lot more modest judgement was appropriate. The reasons can be found here.
__________________________________
In my continued efforts documenting prosecutions following alleged Pay Per view piracy, reasons for judgement were released this week by the united states district Court, N.D. California, assessing damages following piracy of UFC 155.
In today’s case (Joe Hand Promotions Inc v. Munoz) the defendant aired UFC 155 without purchasing a commercial sub licence from the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff sued and obtained default judgement. The Plaintiff asked for maximum statutory damages but the Court instead awarded the minimum plus modest enhanced damages and damages for conversion. In finding the evidence only supported a minimum award the Court supplied the following Camiseta Selección de fútbol de Gales comments:
Plaintiff states that defendant violated section 605, but fails to state the actual indicates of signal transmission used, which is needed to figure out whether Plaintiff has sufficiently stated a claim pursuant to section 605. Here, Plaintiff’s investigator was unable to figure out the exact indicates used by defendant to intercept Camiseta Selección de fútbol de Suiza the Event, and Plaintiff supplied no additional information on this subject Camiseta Arsenal FC beyond Tate’s indefinite affidavit.
In that regard, the Court awards Plaintiff $1,000 in statutory damages. This amount is proper because, as noted, Plaintiff did not develop sufficient facts to justify any increase from the minimum award allowed under the statute. As in other cases filed in this district, Plaintiff’s investigator failed to figure out the indicates used to intercept the Event. Such a presentation — the result of a fifteen-minute investigation — certainly cannot support the maximum award requested by Plaintiff, or anything a lot more than the minimum amount supplied by the statute.
Share this:
Twitter
Facebook
Like this:
Like Loading…
Related
UFC 155 Piracy Leads to $4,300 damage AssessmentJuly 30, 2016In “piracy”
UFC 148 Piracy Leads to $11,848 Court JudgementSeptember 3, 2015In “piracy”
$25,000 damages awarded for UFC 183 PiracyJuly 16, 2017In “piracy”
Leave a Reply