This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Intellectual Property
Copyright Infringement
Vicarious Copyright Infringement

Kerry Marshall Jr. p/k/a Kerry 2Smooth and K2S v. Durrell Babbs p/k/a Tank; Jeremy Hairston; Johnnie Newt; Rickey Offord p/k/a Slikk p/k/a Slikk Muzik; Atlantic Recording Corporation and Does 1-100, inclusive

Published: Jul. 19, 2019 | Result Date: Apr. 10, 2019 | Filing Date: May 8, 2018 |

Case number: 2:18-cv-03822-DDP (AFMx) Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Judge

Dean D. Pregerson

Court

CD CA


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Harry A. Abraham
(Martorell Law APC)

Eduardo Martorell
(Martorell Law APC)


Defendant

Edwin F. McPherson
(McPherson LLP)

Tracy B. Rane


Facts

Kerry Marshall Jr. filed suit against Durrell Babbs, a recording artist and performer professionally known as Tank, and various other defendants in relation to his copyrighted work entitled "RnB Chord and Riff ideas to Help Your Playing."

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: : Marshall claimed that on Sept. 29, 2017, defendant Atlantic Recording Corp. released and distributed a musical work performed by Tank entitled, "Only One," and this work featured identical portions of Marshall's copyrighted work. The allegedly infringing song was part of Tank's album entitled, "Savage," and Marshall claimed copying of his work, which defendants did not deny. However, because plaintiff had failed to register his copyright before the infringement, statutory damages and attorney fees were not available for the initial use on Tank's album "Savage", under the United States Copyright Act, Section 412. However, after registration, Tank published a new Instagram video using one minute of the infringing song. Plaintiff contended this constituted a new and separate basis for statutory damages and attorney fees because of differences between pre- and post-registration infringements under the U.S. Copyright Act, Sections 412, 504(c), and 505.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants claimed that a producer, co-defendant, placed the sample in Tank's track.

After the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss on the issue of statutory damages and attorney fees, defendants argued that Marshall was not entitled to statutory damages and attorney fees on plaintiff's first amendment complaint. Defendants contended because the first allegedly infringing acts occurred prior to Marshall's copyright registration on Dec. 14, 2017, and Tank's Instagram video was merely part of the same alleged acts of infringement.

Result

The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss, finding Marshall alleged new acts of infringement that were part of a continuing series of infringements beginning Sept. 29, 2017.

Other Information

According to plaintiff, the parties settled at a Mandatory Settlement Conference.


#131931

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390