Facts

Plaintiff Dionne Choyce, an attorney at The Choyce Law Firm, sued the SF Bay Area Independent Media Center, also known as SF Bay Area IMC, who operate indybay.org, an independent media website. Co-defendants Layer42.Net, Inc., and Cernio Technology Cooperative, provide web hosting services to the website.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged that an unknown person(s), listed as John Doe defendants in the complaint, posted an article on the indybay.org website claiming that "Dionne choice" had embezzled from the homeless and may serve prison time. The article also included a digital photo of Choyce, that plaintiff claimed had been taken from The Choyce Law Frim website.

Another article was also posted to indybay.org claiming that Choyce's law firm was to be evicted for failure to pay rent, and on account of the alleged embezzlement. Again, Choyce's digital image appeared with the article. Choyce claimed defendants, whose website allows any person to self-publish their work, of copyright infringement as well as state law-based causes of action for defamation and libel.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Layer4.Net filed a motion to strike Choyce's action under California's anti-SLAPP statute. In addition, Layer42.Net sought to dismiss the action, claiming Choyce had failed to state a claim for copyright infringement, and claimed that it was entitled to immunity on the infringement claim under Communications Decency Act (47 U.S.C. 230).

Layer42.Net filed a special motion to strike Choyce's state law claims under California's anti-SLAPP statute, contending the alleged anonymous postings involved matters of public concern, and Choyce couldn't demonstrate a reasonable probability of success against Layer42.Net as to the state law claims.

Damages

Choyce demanded statutory damages and attorney fees for his copyright infringement claim. Choyce also demanded general, special, and punitive damages for defendants' defamatory and libelous conduct.

Result

U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar granted the motion to dismiss the copyright infringement claim, with leave to amend. The court declined to reach the motion to dismiss as to the state law claims. The court granted in part and denied in part Layer42.Net's anti-SLAPP motion, holding that the articles contained a combination of matters of public and private concern, and that Choyce's complaint didn't demonstrate a reasonable probability of success against Layer42.Net. Judge Tigar granted leave to amend the state law claims. The court held that Layer42.Net was the prevailing party for purposes of a subsequent motion for an award of attorney fees and costs.