daniel miller v. facebook

Upload: insidetrademarks

Post on 30-May-2018

221 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    1/23

    -1-

    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    C-10-264 (WHA)

    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

    D. GILL SPERLEIN (172887)THE LAW OFFICE OF D. GILL SPERLEIN

    584 Castro Street, Suite 879

    San Francisco, California 94114Telephone: (415) 404-6615

    Facsimile: (415) [email protected]

    DOUGLAS L. BRIDGES (pro hac vice)

    HENINGER GARRISON DAVIS LLC

    1 Glenlake Parkway, Suite 700Atlanta, Georgia 30328

    Telephone: (678) 638-6309

    Facsimile: (678) [email protected]

    BRIAN D. HANCOCK(pro hac vice)HENINGER GARRISON DAVIS LLC

    2224 1st Avenue North

    Birmingham, AL 35203

    Telephone: (205) 326-3336Facsimile: (205) 326-3332

    [email protected]

    Attorneys for Plaintiff,

    DANIEL M. MILLER

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

    SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

    DANIEL M. MILLER,

    Plaintiff,

    vs.FACEBOOK, INC. and YAO WEI YEO,

    Defendants.

    ))

    )

    ))

    )

    ))

    )

    ))

    CASE NO.: CV-10-264 (WHA)

    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page1 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    2/23

    -2-

    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    C-10-264 (WHA)

    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

    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    Plaintiff Daniel M. Miller (Plaintiff), for its First Amended Complaint

    against Defendants Facebook, Inc. (Facebook) and Yao Wei Yeo (Yeo,

    collectively with Facebook as Defendants), hereby demands a jury trial and

    alleges as follows:

    THE PARTIES

    1. Plaintiff Daniel M. Miller, is an individual residing 2079 Kinsmon

    Drive, Marietta, Georgia 30062.

    2. On information and belief, Defendant Facebook, Inc. is a corporation

    organized and existing under the laws of Delaware with its principal place of

    business at 1601 S. California Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94304.

    3. Upon information and belief, Defendant Yao is an individual with

    unknown address that was not ascertainable after reasonable diligence.

    JURISDICTION AND VENUE

    4. This action arises under the Laws of the United States, 17 U.S.C. 1 et

    seq., including 17 U.S.. 501 and 15 U.S.C. 1 et seq. including 15 U.S.C.

    1125(a).

    5. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

    1331, 1332(a)(1), 1367 and 1338(a).

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page2 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    3/23

    -3-

    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    C-10-264 (WHA)

    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

    6. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1400(b)

    and 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and (c).

    7. On information and belief, Defendant Facebook is subject to personal

    jurisdiction in this district by virtue of, among other things, doing business and

    committing acts of infringement in this State, including in this judicial district,

    through agents and representatives and/or otherwise having substantial contacts with

    this State and this judicial district.

    8. On information and belief Defendant Yeo is subject to personal

    jurisdiction in this district by virtue of, among other things, committing acts of

    infringement in this State, including in this judicial district.

    FACTUAL BACKGROUND

    9. In early 2007, Plaintiff authored the video gameBoomshine.

    10. Boomshine is a game played on the Internet using Adobe Flash

    technology where players click on a floating circle that causes the clicked circle to

    expand and causes other contacted floating circles to likewise expand in a chain

    reaction.

    11. Boomshine was published by Plaintiff on the Internet on the website

    K2xl.com starting on March 9, 2007.

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page3 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    4/23

    -4-

    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    C-10-264 (WHA)

    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

    12. Plaintiff was duly and lawfully granted a copyright registration on

    Boomshine by the United States Copyright Office with registration number

    TX0007089855.

    13. Defendant Yeo does business as Zwigglers Apps on the websites

    www.facebook.com/zwigglers and www.zwigglers.com.

    14. At least as early as April, 2009, Defendant Yeo published the game

    ChainRxn on a website hosted by Defendant Facebook.

    15. Defendant Facebook published ChainRxn in their Application

    Directory which allows every Facebook user to search and view the application

    from within the directory.

    16. Defendant Facebook took the affirmative step to approve ChainRxn for

    publication on its Application Directory.

    17. ChainRxn is a game played on the Internet using Adobe Flash

    technology where players click on a floating circle that causes the clicked circle to

    expand and causes other contacted floating circles to likewise expand in a chain

    reaction.

    18. ChainRxn copies the look and feel ofBoomshine by incorporating

    almost every visual element of the game.

    19. After Defendant Yeo published ChainRxn on Defendant Facebooks

    website, members of the public were deceived regarding the origin ofChainRxn.

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page4 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    5/23

    -5-

    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    C-10-264 (WHA)

    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

    20. Defendant Facebook provides advertisements on the webpage that

    hosts the ChainRxn game.

    21. On May 7, 2009, Plaintiff sent a letter to Defendant Facebook (attached

    hereto as Exhibit A) demanding that Facebook remove ChainRxn from its website

    because it violates Plaintiffs copyrightedBoomshine.

    22. On May 7, 2009, Plaintiff sent a letter to Defendant Yeo (attached

    hereto as Exhibit B) demanding that Defendant Yeo remove ChainRxn from the

    Facebook website because ChainRxn violates Plaintiffs copyrightedBoomshine.

    23. Upon information and belief, after Defendant Yeo received the letter

    from Plaintiff demanding that he remove ChainRxn from the Facebook website,

    Defendant Yeo modified ChainRxn to prevent Plaintiff or anyone listing Plaintiff as

    his friend on the Facebook website from accessing or viewing ChainRxn.

    24. Despite the demands by Plaintiff that Defendants remove ChainRxn

    from the Facebook website, they have refused to do so.

    COUNT ONE

    Copyright Infringement of the by Defendants

    25. Plaintiff repeats and incorporate here in the entirety of the allegations

    contained in paragraphs 1 though 24 above.

    26. Without authorization, Defendant Facebook reproduced and distributed

    the program ChainRxn, which infringes the copyright of the following Plaintiff

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page5 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    6/23

    -6-

    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    C-10-264 (WHA)

    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

    owned and copyrighted work by copying its look and feel: Boomshine, U.S.

    Copyright Registration.

    27. Without authorization, Defendant Facebook induced and encouraged

    the infringement of the Boomshine work by refusing to remove ChainRxn from

    Facebook after being notified of its infringement of the copyright inBoomshine.

    28. Without authorization, Defendant Yeo reproduced and distributed the

    program ChainRxn, which infringes the copyright of the following Plaintiff owned

    and copyrighted work by copying its look and feel: Boomshine, U.S. Copyright

    Registration TX0007089855.

    29. Plaintiff did not authorize Defendants copying, display or distribution

    of infringing copies of his work.

    30. Defendants knew that ChainRxn infringed Plaintiffs Boomshine

    copyright and that they did not have permission to exploit Plaintiffs works.

    31. Defendants knew that their acts constituted copyright infringement.

    32. Defendants conduct was willful within the meaning of the Copyright

    Act.

    33. As a result of their wrongful conduct, Defendants are liable to Plaintiff

    for copyright infringement pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 501. Plaintiff has suffered, and

    will continue to suffer, substantial losses, including but not limited to damage to his

    business reputation and goodwill.

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page6 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    7/23

    -7-

    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    C-10-264 (WHA)

    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

    34. Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages, which include his losses and

    any and all profits Defendants have made as a result of their wrongful conduct.

    WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for a judgment against Defendants on all

    counts as follows:

    A.That this Court enter permanent injunctive relief enjoining and

    retraining Defendant Facebook, its officers, directors, employees,

    agents, licensees, servants, successors, and assigns, and any and all

    persons in active concert or participation with any of them, from the

    manufacture, publication, display, distribution, advertising of, sale, or

    offer for sale ofChainRxn and any other work which infringes

    Plaintiffs copyrights inBoomshine;

    B.That this Court enter permanent injunctive relief enjoining and

    retraining Defendant Yeo, his agents, licensees, servants, successors,

    and assigns, and any and all persons in active concert or participation

    with any of them, from the manufacture, publication, display,

    distribution, advertising of, sale, or offer for sale ofChainRxn and any

    other work which infringes Plaintiffs copyrights inBoomshine;

    C.That this Court enter an order adjudging that Defendants have willful

    infringed upon Plaintiffs copyrights in and toBoomshine;

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page7 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    8/23

    -8-

    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    C-10-264 (WHA)

    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

    D.That this Court require Defendants to disgorge and to account to

    Plaintiff for any and all profits derived by Defendants from the

    manufacture, production, publication, distribution, advertisement, sale,

    transfer or other exploitation of the game ChainRxn;

    E.That this Court award Plaintiff damages against Defendants in an

    amount to be determined at Trial;

    F. That this Court grants such other and further relief as it shall deem just

    and proper, including interest and the costs and disbursements of this

    action.

    PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY.

    Dated:March 17, 2010

    Respectfully submitted,

    /s/D. Gill Sperlein

    D.GILL SPERLEINTHE LAW OFFICE OF D.GILL SPERLEIN

    584 Castro Street, Suite 879

    San Francisco, CA 94114Telephone: (415) 404-6615

    Facsimile: (415) 404-6616

    E-mail: [email protected]

    DOUGLAS L.BRIDGES (pro hac vice)HENINGER GARRISON DAVIS LLC

    1 Glenlake Parkway, Suite 700Atlanta, Georgia 30328

    Telephone: 678-638-6309

    Facsimile: 678-638-6142Email: [email protected]

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page8 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    9/23

    -9-

    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    C-10-264 (WHA)

    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

    BRIAN D.HANCOCK (pro hac vice)HENINGER GARRISON DAVIS LLC

    2224 1st Avenue North

    Birmingham, Alabama, 35203Telephone: (205) 326-3336

    Facsimile: (205) 326-3332

    ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page9 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    10/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page10 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    11/23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    12/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page12 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    13/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page13 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    14/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page14 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    15/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page15 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    16/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page16 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    17/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page17 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    18/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page18 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    19/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page19 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    20/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page20 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    21/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page21 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    22/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page22 of 23

  • 8/9/2019 Daniel Miller v. Facebook

    23/23

    Case3:10-cv-00264-WHA Document37 Filed03/17/10 Page23 of 23