Traverse Internet Law Disclaimer
The facts are unproven allegations of the Plaintiff and all commentary is based upon the allegations, the truthfulness and accuracy of which are likely in dispute.
MATTHEW ROSENBERG v. SPICY BEAR MEDIA, LLC, ET AL.
WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA (CHARLOTTESVILLE)
If the website did not post this image and they have registered an agent with the copyright office for purposes of receipt of DMCA takedown notices, then there should be no liability for the website if no takedown notice was served on the Defendant.
Rosenberg is a professional photographer who took a photograph of a venue in Charlottesville, VA. The Defendants are alleged to have copied, reproduced, and created a derivative work of the photograph on multiple occasions and used it on its local website serving the Charlottesville, VA area. The primary Defendant, the owner and operator of the website on which the image was posted by an apparent third party, is alleged to have failed to remove the image after knowing of the infringement claim. It is not clear from the pleading that any DMCA takedown notice was served on the website.
The Defendants have been sued for copyright infringement, the removal and alteration of copyright management information, and vicarious and contributory copyright infringement. Plaintiff requests an award of statutory damages of $150,000.00 per infringement, reasonable attorneys’ fees, court costs and a disgorgement of gains and profits from the Defendants. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1320.