1

Stephen M. Doniger (SBN 179314)

2 stephen@donigerlawfirm.com
3 Scott Alan Burroughs (SBN 235718)

scott@donigerlawfirm.com

4 Trevor W. Barrett (SBN 287174)

5 tbarrett@donigerlawfirm.com

Justin M. Gomes (SBN 301793)

6 jgomes@donigerlawfirm.com
7 DONIGER / BURROUGHS

603 Rose Avenue

8 Venice, California 90291

9 Telephone: (310) 590-1820

Attorneys for Plaintiff

10 DR. MAX HATTLER

11
12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14
15

DR. MAX HATTLER, an individual,

16

Plaintiff,

Case No.:
COMPLAINT FOR:
1. COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

17
18
19
20

v.

2. VIOLATIONS OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL CODE 987

LORIN ASHTON, individually, and

doing business as BASSNECTAR; and
DOES 1-10, inclusive,

3. VIOLATION OF THE DIGITAL

MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT
ACT (17 U.S.C. 1202)

21
22

Defendants.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

23
24
25
26
27
28

1
COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, DR. MAX HATTLER (HATTLER), by and through his

2 undersigned attorneys, hereby prays to this honorable Court for relief based on the
3 following:

INTRODUCTION

This case concerns the theft of original content by an electronic music

6 performer named Lorin Ashton (ASHTON) whose recorded and live1 shows rely
7 heavily on the exploitation of the work of visual artists. Plaintiff, HATTLER, a visual
8 artist, brings this claim against ASHTON to seek redress for the unauthorized and
9 unlawful misappropriation, performance, and exploitation of HATTLERs original
10 imagery.

HATTLER is an artist, experimental filmmaker, and Assistant Professor at the

11

12 City University of Hong Kongs School of Creative Media. Solo exhibitions and
13 retrospectives of his work have been shown at Pinakothek der Moderne Munich,
14 Tenderpixel London, Playgrounds Festival, and Lago Film Fest, among other venues.
15 HATTLER has received various awards, such as Cannes Lions, Bradford Animation
16 Festival, St. Louis Film Festival, London International Animation Festival, and
17 several Visual Music Awards. He has performed his work live at an array of
18 locations, including the Seoul Museum of Art, Reykjavik Visual Music, Re-New
19 Festival Copenhagen, and the European Media Art Festival. HATTLERS works of
20 art include original pieces entitled 1923 aka Heaven and Sync.

ASHTON, an electronic dance music artist who performs under the moniker

21

22 Bassnectar, derives revenue and builds the value of his brand through performances
23 of music accompanied by compelling visual and animated art, and the exhibition of
24 these shows online and in other fora. In August 2013, a Bassnectar agent, acting on
25
1

The term live is used loosely here, as, on information and belief, it is alleged that
ASHTONs performance consists primarily of the pressing of buttons and twisting of
27
knobs on an electronic or computer console.
26

28

2
COMPLAINT

1 ASHTONS behalf, reached out to HATTLER regarding a request by ASHTON to

2 incorporate HATTLERs original work into ASHTONs live performances.
3 HATTLER declined, but ASHTON nevertheless incorporated portions of
4 HATTLERs Sync and 1923 aka Heaven, into his performances, exhibiting and
5 displaying both original and modified forms of HATTLERs work without a license
6 or authorization.
7

ASHTONs illegal copying of HATTLERs content has unjustly enriched

8 ASHTON, resulted in a diminution in the value of 1923 aka Heaven and Sync,
9 and negatively impacted Plaintiffs ability to monetize his work. ASTHONs
10 conduct, as described herein, violates the Copyright Act.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

11
12

1.

This action arises under the Copyright Act of 1976, Title 17 U.S.C.,

13 101 et seq.
14

2.

This Court has federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and

15 1338 (a) and (b).

16

3.

Venue in this judicial district is proper under 28 U.S.C. 1391(c) and

17 1400(a) in that this is the judicial district in which a substantial part of the acts and
18 omissions giving rise to the claims occurred.

PARTIES

19
20

4.

HATTLER is a German citizen currently residing in Hong Kong.

21

5.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant

22 ASHTON does business as Bassnectar, is domiciled in California, and is doing

23 business in California.
24

6.

Defendants DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are other parties not yet

25 identified who have infringed Plaintiffs copyrights, have contributed to the

26 infringement of Plaintiffs copyrights, or have engaged in one or more of the
27 wrongful practices alleged herein. The true names, whether corporate, individual or
28

3
COMPLAINT

1 otherwise, of Defendants 1 through 10, inclusive, are presently unknown to Plaintiff,

2 who therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitious names, and will seek leave to
3 amend this Complaint to show their true names and capacities when same have been
4 ascertained.
5

7.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times

6 relevant hereto each of the Defendants was the agent, affiliate, officer, director,
7 manager, principal, alter-ego, and/or employee of the remaining Defendants and was
8 at all times acting within the scope of such agency, affiliation, alter-ego relationship
9 and/or employment; and actively participated in or subsequently ratified and adopted,
10 or both, each and all of the acts or conduct alleged, with full knowledge of all the
11 facts and circumstances, including, but not limited to, full knowledge of each and
12 every violation of Plaintiffs rights and the damages to Plaintiff proximately caused
13 thereby.

CLAIMS RELATED TO 1923 AKA HEAVEN AND SYNC

14
15

8.

Plaintiff authored two original visual works entitled 1923 aka Heaven

16 and Sync (hereinafter referred to as the Subject Works). The Subject Works were
17 published before the infringement at issue, and have been submitted for registration
18 with the Copyright Office. And, per the Berne Implementation Act of 1988, the
19 registration requirement is waived for the Subject Works.
20

9.

On information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that ASHTON accessed and

21 commercially published and exhibited original material from 1923 aka Heaven and
22 Sync without permission. ASHTON also published Plaintiffs work as part of his
23 online marketing. Non-inclusive true and correct depictions of portions of the Subject
24 Works and the corresponding unauthorized uses of the Subject Works are attached
25 hereto as Exhibit A.
26
27
28

4
COMPLAINT

10. ASHTON had knowledge that the Subject Works were created and

2 owned by HATTLER before ASHTON committed the infringement herein, making

3 such infringement willful.
4

11. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that, without

5 Plaintiffs authorization, Defendants, and each of them, used, performed, published,

6 and exhibited imagery that is identical, or substantially similar, to 1923 aka Heaven
7 and Sync.
8

12. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that ASHTON and

9 DOE Defendants organize, operate, and broadcast performances, concerts, and live
10 shows and derive revenue in connection with the foregoing, and that those revenues
11 are attributable in part to ASHTONs use of Plaintiffs Subject Works.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

12
13

(For Direct, Contributory, and Vicarious Copyright Infringement Against all

Defendants, and Each)

14
15

13.

Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges, and incorporates herein by reference as

16 though fully set forth, the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this
17 Complaint.
18

14.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,

19 and each of them, had access to the Subject Works, including, without limitation,
20 through viewing the Subject Works on Plaintiffs website and elsewhere online.
21

15. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,

22 and each of them, used material that was copied from the Subject Works, and
23 exploited said footage in various performances and exhibitions.
24

16. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,

25 and each of them, infringed Plaintiffs copyrights by creating infringing and/or

26 derivative works from the Subject Works and by performing the works that infringe
27
28

5
COMPLAINT

1 Plaintiffs rights in the Subject Works to the public, including without limitation,
2 through live performances and online broadcasts.
3

17. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,

4 and each of them, infringed Plaintiffs rights by copying material from the Subject
5 Works without Plaintiffs authorization or consent.
6

18. Defendants, and each of them, had the right and ability to supervise the

7 infringing activity at issue herein, as well as a direct financial interest in such

8 activities. Defendants, and each of them, consented to and took no steps to stop or
9 address the infringement, rendering each of them liable for vicarious infringement.
10

19. Defendants, and each of them, with knowledge of the infringing activity

11 at issue herein, induced, caused or materially contributed to the infringing conduct,

12 rendering each of them liable for contributory infringement.
13

20. Due to Defendants, and each of their, acts of infringement, Plaintiff has

14 suffered general and special damages in an amount to be established at trial.

15

21. Due to Defendants acts of copyright infringement as alleged herein,

16 Defendants, and each of them, have obtained direct and indirect profits they would
17 not otherwise have realized but for their infringement of Plaintiffs rights in the
18 Subject Works. As such, Plaintiff is entitled to disgorgement of Defendants profits
19 directly and indirectly attributable to Defendants infringement of his rights in the
20 Subject Works in an amount to be established at trial.
21

22.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,

22 and each of them, have committed acts of copyright infringement, as alleged above,
23 which were willful, intentional and malicious, which further subjects Defendants, and
24 each of them, to liability for statutory damages under Section 504(c)(2) of the
25 Copyright Act in the sum of up to one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000.00)
26 per infringement and/or a preclusion from certain defenses and profit analyses.
27
28

6
COMPLAINT

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

1
2

(For Violations of California Civil Code 987 Against all Defendants, and

Each)

23. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges, and incorporates herein by reference as

5 though fully set forth, the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this
6 Complaint.
7

24. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants

8 willfully and intentionally defaced, mutilated, altered or destroyed, or authorized the

9 mutilation, alteration or destruction of Plaintiffs original works of fine art by, inter
10 alia, overlaying it with frog and other imagery, modifying the coloration, and
11 removing elements from Plaintiffs work, and doing so without notice and in
12 violation of Plaintiffs rights.
13

25. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,

14 and each of them, are liable for the physical alteration or destruction of Plaintiffs
15 fine art because Defendants, and each, had notice of Plaintiffs rights and consciously
16 disregarded same.
17

26. By reason of the Defendants, and each of their, acts of destruction or

18 alteration as alleged above, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer
19 substantial damages to his business in an amount to be established at trial, as well as
20 additional general and special damages in an amount to be established at trial.
21

27. Due to Defendants acts of alteration and destruction as alleged herein,

22 Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief, actual damages, punitive damages, reasonable

23 attorneys and expert witness fees, or any other relief which the court deems proper,
24 under California Civil Code 987(e), in an amount to be established at trial.
25
26
27
28

7
COMPLAINT

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

1
2

(For Violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. 1202

Against all Defendants, and Each)

28.

Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges, and incorporates herein by reference as

5 though fully set forth, the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this
6 Complaint.
7

29.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,

8 and each of them, violated 17 U.S.C. 1202 et seq. by intentionally removing and/or
9 altering the copyright management information on the copy of the Subject Work
10 created by Defendants, and each (Mislabeled Copy), and distributing copyright
11 management information for the Mislabeled Copy with knowledge that the copyright
12 management information had been removed or altered without authority of the
13 copyright owner or the law, and distributing and publicly displaying the Mislabeled
14 Copy, knowing that copyright management information had been removed or altered
15 without authority of the copyright owner or the law, and knowing, or, with respect to
16 civil remedies under section 1203, having reasonable grounds to know, that the
17 conduct would induce, enable, facilitate, or conceal an infringement of any right
18 under this title. In addition, certain of the Mislabeled Copies included alterations and
19 manipulations by Defendants, and each of them, that appear to attribute or associate
20 one or more of the Subject Works to ASHTON. These acts further violate 1202.
21

30.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,

22

and each of them, knowingly removed and altered the copyright management

23

information on the Mislabeled Copy. A true and correct copy of certain exemplars of

24

this unlawful manipulation is set forth in Exhibit B hereto.

25
26

31.

The above conduct is in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright

Act and exposes Defendants, and each of them, to additional and enhanced common

27
28

8
COMPLAINT

law and statutory damages and penalties, including in the form of Plaintiffs costs

and attorneys fees, pursuant to 17 USC 1203 and other applicable law.

32.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants,

and each of their, conduct as alleged herein was willful, reckless, and/or with

knowledge, and Plaintiff resultantly seeks enhanced damage and penalties.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

7
8
9
10

Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgment as follows:

Against all Defendants, and Each:
With Respect to Each Claim for Relief:

11

a. That Defendants, and each of them, as well as their employees, agents,

12

or anyone acting in concert with them, be enjoined from infringing

13

Plaintiffs copyrights in the Subject Works, including without limitation

14

an order requiring Defendants, and each of them, to remove any content

15

incorporating, in whole or in part, the Subject Work from any

16

performance, film, video, publication, network, or other forum owned,

17

operated, or controlled by any Defendant.

18

b. That Plaintiff be awarded all profits of Defendants, and each of them,

19

plus all losses of Plaintiff, plus any other monetary advantage gained by

20

the Defendants, and each of them, through their infringement, the exact

21

sum to be proven at the time of trial, and, to the extent available,

22

statutory damages as available under the Copyright Act and other

23

applicable law.

24

c. That a constructive trust be entered over any revenues or other proceeds

25

realized by Defendants, and each of them, through their infringement of

26

Plaintiffs intellectual property rights;

27
28

9
COMPLAINT

d. That Plaintiff be awarded his costs and attorneys fees as available under

the Copyright Act, U.S.C. 101 et seq., 17 U.S.C. 1203, and other

applicable statutes;

4
5
6
7

e. That Plaintiff be awarded general, punitive, and special damages

available under California Civil Code 987;
f. That Plaintiff be awarded statutory damages and penalties under the
statues set forth above;

g. That Plaintiff be awarded pre-judgment interest as allowed by law;

h. That Plaintiff be awarded the costs of this action; and

10
11
12

i. That Plaintiff be awarded such further legal and equitable relief as the
Court deems proper.
Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues so triable pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.

th
13 38 and the 7 Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Respectfully submitted,

14
15
16 Dated: June 9, 2016

By:

/s/ Scott Alan Burroughs

Scott Alan Burroughs, Esq.
Trevor W. Barrett, Esq.
Justin M. Gomes, Esq.
DONIGER / BURROUGHS
Attorneys for Plaintiff
DR. MAX HATTLER

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

10
COMPLAINT