Blaine Harrington, III v. Deepak Dugar
2:22-cv-08230
C.D. Cal.Aug 27, 2024Background
- Plaintiff, as representative of the estate of photographer Blaine Harrington III, prevailed in a jury trial against Defendant Deepak Dugar, M.D., for copyright infringement of a photograph registered in 2013.
- Defendant displayed the copyrighted photo on his website from 2020 to 2022 without permission.
- The jury found for Plaintiff and awarded $10,000 in statutory damages; Plaintiff then moved for attorneys’ fees under 17 U.S.C. § 505.
- Defendant had initially asserted numerous defenses and counterclaims (including copyright misuse and implied license) but withdrew most only on the eve of trial.
- The district court evaluated fees after extensive litigation and trial, reviewing hundreds of hours billed by Plaintiff’s legal team and the reasonableness of their hourly rates.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff’s Argument | Defendant’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Award of attorneys’ fees appropriate? | Plaintiff prevailed and faced frivolous defenses. | Defendant claimed Plaintiff’s victory was minimal; defenses were reasonable. | Fees appropriate—Plaintiff is prevailing party. |
| Degree of success required | Success is based on establishing liability. | Limited damages mean limited success. | Success need not be tied to amount. |
| Reasonableness/frivolousness of defense | Defendant’s positions and timing were unreasonable. | Defenses were not frivolous; expert report exclusion was decisive. | Defenses objectively unreasonable, fees warranted. |
| Calculation of reasonable fee | Hours and rates are reasonable given the work done. | Plaintiff’s demands and rates are excessive; multiplier inappropriate. | Hourly rates and time spent are reasonable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517 (fee awards in copyright cases are discretionary and subject to equitable considerations)
- Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 579 U.S. 197 (articulates purpose and goals to guide fee awards under Copyright Act)
- Entertainment Research Grp., Inc. v. Genesis Creative Grp., Inc., 122 F.3d 1211 (broad district court discretion over fee awards)
- Wall Data Inc. v. Los Angeles Cnty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, 447 F.3d 769 (lists factors for fee awards in copyright cases)
- Chalmers v. City of Los Angeles, 796 F.2d 1205 (using local rates and attorney experience to set reasonable fees)