Case 1:20-cv-03552-PAC Document 1 Filed 05/06/20 Page 1 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`
`- against -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`Docket No. 1:20-cv-3552
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`HELAYNE SEIDMAN,
`
`
`
`
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`VOX MEDIA, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiff Helayne Seidman (“Seidman” or “Plaintiff”) by and through her undersigned
`
`counsel, as and for her Complaint against Defendant Vox Media, Inc. (“Vox Media” or
`
`“Defendant”) hereby alleges as follows:
`
` NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is an action for copyright infringement under Section 501 of the Copyright
`
`Act and for the removal and/or alteration of copyright management information under Section
`
`1202(b) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. This action arises out of Defendant’s
`
`unauthorized reproduction and public display of a copyrighted photograph of luxury apartment
`
`building Gotham West on 45th Street in New York, owned and registered by Seidman, a New
`
`York based professional photographer. Accordingly, Seidman seeks monetary relief under the
`
`Copyright Act of the United States, as amended, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`This claim arises under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq., and this Court
`
`2.
`
`has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`
`- against -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`Docket No. 1:20-cv-3552
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`HELAYNE SEIDMAN,
`
`
`
`
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`VOX MEDIA, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiff Helayne Seidman (“Seidman” or “Plaintiff”) by and through her undersigned
`
`counsel, as and for her Complaint against Defendant Vox Media, Inc. (“Vox Media” or
`
`“Defendant”) hereby alleges as follows:
`
` NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is an action for copyright infringement under Section 501 of the Copyright
`
`Act and for the removal and/or alteration of copyright management information under Section
`
`1202(b) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. This action arises out of Defendant’s
`
`unauthorized reproduction and public display of a copyrighted photograph of luxury apartment
`
`building Gotham West on 45th Street in New York, owned and registered by Seidman, a New
`
`York based professional photographer. Accordingly, Seidman seeks monetary relief under the
`
`Copyright Act of the United States, as amended, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`This claim arises under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq., and this Court
`
`2.
`
`has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-03552-PAC Document 1 Filed 05/06/20 Page 2 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, this Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant
`
`because Defendant resides and/or transacts business in New York.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
`
`PARTIES
`
`Seidman is a professional photographer in the business of licensing her
`
`photographs to online and print media for a fee having a usual place of business at 16 St. Marks
`
`Place, Apt 4B, New York, New York 10003.
`
`6.
`
`Upon information and belief, Vox Media is a foreign limited liability company
`
`duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with a place of business at
`
`85 Broad Street, New York, New York 10004. Upon information and belief, Vox Media in
`
`registered with the New York State Department of Corporations to do business in New York. At
`
`all times material hereto, Vox Media has owned and operated a website at the URL:
`
`www.NY.Curbed.com (the “Website”).
`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`Background and Plaintiff’s Ownership of the Photograph
`
`Seidman photographed luxury apartment building Gotham West on 45th Street in
`
`A.
`
`7.
`
`New York (the “Photograph”). A true and correct copy of the Photograph is attached hereto as
`
`Exhibit A.
`
`8.
`
`Seidman then licensed the Photograph to New York Post. The New York Post ran
`
`an article that featured the Photograph titled What the luck? Quinn aide approved for coveted
`
`apartment. See URL: https://nypost.com/2013/11/17/quinn-aide-approved-for-coveted-
`
`apartment-in-gotham-west-complex/. Seidman’s name was featured in a gutter credit identifying
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-03552-PAC Document 1 Filed 05/06/20 Page 3 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`her as the photographer of the Photograph. A true and correct copy of the article is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit B.
`
`9.
`
`Seidman is the author of the Photograph and has at all times been the sole owner
`
`of all right, title and interest in and to the Photograph, including the copyright thereto.
`
`10.
`
`The Photograph was registered with United States Copyright Office and was
`
`given Copyright Registration Number VA 2-023-500.
`
`B.
`
`11.
`
`Defendant’s Infringing Activities
`
`Vox Media ran an article on the Website entitled Mapping Affordable Rentals
`
`Taking Applications Right Now. See: https://ny.curbed.com/maps/mapping-affordable-rentals-
`
`taking-applications-right-now. The article featured the Photograph. A screenshot of the
`
`Photograph on the Website is attached hereto as Exhibit C.
`
`12.
`
`Vox Media did not license the Photograph from Plaintiff for its article, nor did
`
`Vox Media have Plaintiff’s permission or consent to publish the Photograph on its Website.
`
`13.
`
`Seidman first discovered the use of the Photograph on the Website in August
`
`2018.
`
`
`
`FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`(COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT)
`(17 U.S.C. §§ 106, 501)
`
`14.
`
`Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in
`
`Paragraphs 1-13 above.
`
`15.
`
`Vox Media infringed Plaintiff’s copyright in the Photograph by reproducing and
`
`publicly displaying the Photograph on the Website. Vox Media is not, and has never been,
`
`licensed or otherwise authorized to reproduce, publically display, distribute and/or use the
`
`Photograph.
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-03552-PAC Document 1 Filed 05/06/20 Page 4 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`16.
`
`The acts of Defendant complained of herein constitute infringement of Plaintiff’s
`
`copyright and exclusive rights under copyright in violation of Sections 106 and 501 of the
`
`Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §§ 106 and 501.
`
`17.
`
`Upon information and belief, the foregoing acts of infringement by Vox Media
`
`have been willful, intentional, and purposeful, in disregard of and indifference to Plaintiff’s
`
`rights.
`
`18.
`
`As a direct and proximate cause of the infringement by the Defendant of
`
`Plaintiff’s copyright and exclusive rights under copyright, Plaintiff is entitled to damages and
`
`Defendant’s profits pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504(b) for the infringement.
`
`SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`INTEGRITY OF COPYRIGHT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION AGAINST
`DEFENDANT
`(17 U.S.C. § 1202)
`
`Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in
`
`19.
`
`Paragraphs 1-18 above.
`
`20.
`
`Upon information and belief, in its article on the Website, Defendant copied the
`
`Photograph from New York Post which contained a gutter credit underneath the Photograph
`
`stating, “Helayne Seidman” and placed it on its Website without the gutter credit.
`
`21.
`
`Upon information and belief, Vox Media intentionally and knowingly removed
`
`copyright management information identifying Plaintiff as the photographer of the Photograph.
`
`22.
`
`23.
`
`The conduct of Vox Media violates 17 U.S.C. § 1202(b).
`
`Upon information and belief, Vox Media’ falsification, removal and/or alteration
`
`of the aforementioned copyright management information was made without the knowledge or
`
`consent of Plaintiff.
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-03552-PAC Document 1 Filed 05/06/20 Page 5 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`24.
`
`Upon information and belief, the falsification, alteration and/or removal of said
`
`copyright management information was made by Vox Media intentionally, knowingly and with
`
`the intent to induce, enable, facilitate, or conceal their infringement of Plaintiff’s copyright in the
`
`Photograph. Vox Media also knew, or should have known, that such falsification, alteration
`
`and/or removal of said copyright management information would induce, enable, facilitate, or
`
`conceal their infringement of Plaintiff’s copyright in the Photograph.
`
`25.
`
`As a result of the wrongful conduct of Vox Media as alleged herein, Plaintiff is
`
`entitled to recover from Vox Media the damages, that he sustained and will sustain, and any
`
`gains, profits and advantages obtained by Vox Media because of their violations of 17 U.S.C. §
`
`1202, including attorney’s fees and costs.
`
`26.
`
`Alternatively, Plaintiff may elect to recover from Vox Media statutory damages
`
`pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1203(c) (3) in a sum of at least $2,500 up to $25,000 for each violation
`
`of 17 U.S.C. § 1202.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment as follows:
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`That Defendant Vox Media be adjudged to have infringed upon Plaintiff’s
`
`copyrights in the Photograph in violation of 17 U.S.C §§ 106 and 501;
`
`The Defendant Vox Media be adjudged to have falsified, removed and/or altered
`
`copyright management information in violation of 17 U.S.C. § 1202.
`
`That Plaintiff be awarded Plaintiff’s actual damages and Defendant’s profits,
`
`gains or advantages of any kind attributable to Defendant’s infringement of
`
`Plaintiff’s Photograph;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-03552-PAC Document 1 Filed 05/06/20 Page 6 of 7
`
`4.
`
`That, with regard to the Second Claim for Relief, Plaintiff be awarded either:
`
`a) Plaintiff’s actual damages and Defendant’s profits, gains or advantages of any
`
`kind attributable to Defendant’s falsification, removal and/or alteration of
`
`copyright management information; or b) alternatively, statutory damages of at
`
`least $2,500 and up to $ 25,000 for each instance of false copyright management
`
`information and/or removal or alteration of copyright management information
`
`committed by Defendant pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1203(c);
`
`That Defendant be required to account for all profits, income, receipts, or other
`
`benefits derived by Defendant as a result of its unlawful conduct;
`
`That Plaintiff be awarded her costs, expenses and attorneys’ fees pursuant to
`
`17 U.S.C. § 1203(b);
`
`That Plaintiff be awarded punitive damages for copyright infringement;
`
`That Plaintiff be awarded attorney’s fees and costs;
`
`That Plaintiff be awarded pre-judgment interest; and
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`10.
`
`Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable in accordance with Federal
`
`Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b).
`
`Dated: Valley Stream, New York
`May 6, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`LIEBOWITZ LAW FIRM, PLLC
`By: /s/Richard Liebowitz
` Richard P. Liebowitz
`11 Sunrise Plaza, Suite 305
`Valley Stream, NY 11580
`Tel: (516) 233-1660
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-03552-PAC Document 1 Filed 05/06/20 Page 7 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`RL@LiebowitzLawFirm.com
`
` Attorneys for Plaintiff Helayne Seidman
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
