Rundquist v. VAPIANO SE
798 F. Supp. 2d 102
D.D.C.2011Background
- Ewa-Marie Rundquist, a Swedish photographer, alleges Vapiano restaurants display her photographs as central décor without permission, in the U.S. and internationally.
- Plaintiff sues Vapiano SE (Germany), Vapiano International, LLC, and Vapiano Franchise USA, LLC, asserting direct, contributory, and vicarious copyright infringement and foreign copyright-law claims.
- Vapiano SE moves to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction over foreign infringement, and for forum non conveniens.
- Court denies Vapiano SE’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, subject to a sixty-day jurisdictional-discovery period for Vapiano SE’s district ties.
- Count I and II are dismissed to the extent they allege Vapiano SE direct or contributory infringement for foreign acts; Count III remains viable for foreign copyright claims, and Counts I-III survive against Vapiano International and Vapiano USA.
- Court maintains jurisdiction over foreign infringement claims under Count III and over foreign-law claims, while denying forum non conveniens dismissal for foreign acts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court has personal jurisdiction over Vapiano SE | Rundquist argues Vapiano SE transacts business in DC via ownership/control of restaurants and website activities. | Vapiano SE contends no DC presence, no control over US entities, and no direct transactions in DC. | Jurisdiction denied without prejudice; 60 days for discovery. |
| Whether the court has subject matter jurisdiction over foreign infringement under the Copyright Act for Vapiano SE | Rundquist asserts predicate acts in US support extraterritorial claims abroad. | Vapiano SE argues Copyright Act has no extraterritorial reach for foreign acts. | Count I against Vapiano SE for foreign infringement dismissed; Court can hear domestic predicate acts and foreign-law claims against others. |
| Whether the court may adjudicate contributory/vicarious liability for foreign infringement by Vapiano SE | Rundquist contends liability can attach for foreign acts via contributory/vicarious theories based on domestic acts. | Vapiano SE argues extraterritorial liability is improper absent domestic predicate acts. | Count II against Vapiano SE dismissed; Counts against remaining defendants remain under Count II; foreign acts subject to foreign-law claims under Count III. |
| Whether the court has subject matter jurisdiction over foreign-law copyright claims (Count III) | Rundquist seeks application of foreign copyright laws for infringement abroad. | Vapiano SE contends court should decline foreign-law claims or dismiss them under various theories. | Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Count III and may adjudicate foreign-law claims. |
| Whether the foreign-infringement claims should be dismissed on forum non conveniens grounds | Rundquist asserts single forum is appropriate; foreign-law claims should proceed here. | Vapiano SE seeks dismissal to pursue alternative fora. | Forum non conveniens motion denied; no adequate alternate forum shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Subafilms, Ltd. v. MGM-Pathe Communications Co., 24 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir. 1994) (extraterritoriality rule; no extraterritorial copyright liability absent domestic predicate acts)
- Update Art, Inc. v. Modiin Publ’g, Ltd., 843 F.2d 67 (2d Cir. 1988) (copyright does not have extraterritorial effect)
- Armstrong v. Virgin Records, 91 F. Supp. 2d 628 (S.D.N.Y. 2000) (extraterritoriality exception for predicate acts in US initiating foreign infringement)
- Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (U.S. 1985) (franchise contacts in forum must amount to more than contract)
- London Film Prods. Ltd. v. Intercontinental Comm’ns Inc., 580 F. Supp. 47 (S.D.N.Y. 1984) (courts may adjudicate foreign infringement under foreign copyright law; Berne considerations)
- Boosey & Hawkes Music Publishers, Ltd. v. Walt Disney Co., 145 F.3d 481 (2d Cir. 1998) (forum non conveniens analysis in copyright context; consolidating worldwide claims)
- Blue Ribbon Pet Prods. v. Rolf C. Hagen (USA) Corp., 66 F. Supp. 2d 454 (E.D.N.Y. 1999) (contributory infringement where underlying acts occur in the US; extraterritorial reach requires domestic predicate acts)
- GTE New Media Servs. v. BellSouth Corp., 199 F.3d 1343 (D.C.Cir. 2000) (interactive vs passive websites; criteria for personal jurisdiction online)