Sternbaum v. The Refinery Lab, LLC
1:22-cv-22002
S.D. Fla.Nov 4, 2022Background
- Plaintiff Beth Sternbaum created and registered a photograph (Registration No. VA 2-219-754) before the alleged infringement.
- On or about February 11, 2021, The Refinery Lab, LLC posted an advertisement on its Facebook page that used Plaintiff’s photograph without a license or permission.
- Plaintiff filed a copyright infringement complaint; Defendant was served on August 18, 2022, but failed to answer despite an extension and a court order; Clerk’s default entered on October 25, 2022.
- Plaintiff sought statutory damages of $15,000 (alleging willful infringement) and attorneys’ fees ($1,500) plus costs ($465).
- The Court treated the well‑pleaded allegations as admitted by default, found ownership and exact copying established, inferred willfulness from the default, and granted the requested damages, fees, and costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Copyright infringement (ownership & copying) | Sternbaum holds a valid registration and Defendant posted an exact copy on Facebook | No answer; default | Complaint states claim; ownership and copying established; default judgment for plaintiff |
| Willfulness of infringement | Defendant acted with actual knowledge or reckless disregard; requests enhanced statutory damages | No defense; default | Default permits inference of willfulness; court finds infringement willful |
| Statutory damages amount | Requests $15,000 (statutory, reflecting willfulness; invoices suggest typical license $2,250–$10,000; estimates actual ≈ $5,000) | No response | Court awards $15,000 in statutory damages as reasonable and deterrent |
| Attorneys’ fees and costs | Seeks $1,500 in fees and $465 in costs; supported by counsel declaration | No response | Court awards requested fees and costs as reasonable under 17 U.S.C. § 505 |
Key Cases Cited
- Tyco Fire & Sec., LLC v. Alcocer, [citation="218 F. App'x 860"] (11th Cir. 2007) (standard for default judgment and need to ensure complaint states claim)
- Chudasama v. Mazda Motor Corp., 123 F.3d 1353 (11th Cir. 1997) (a default judgment cannot stand on a complaint that fails to state a claim)
- Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991) (elements of copyright infringement: ownership and copying)
- Latimer v. Roaring Toyz, Inc., 601 F.3d 1224 (11th Cir. 2010) (copying requires factual copying and substantial similarity)
- SEC v. Smyth, 420 F.3d 1225 (11th Cir. 2005) (Rule 55(b)(2) hearings on damages not required when evidence is on the record)
- Arista Records, Inc. v. Beker Enterps. Inc., 298 F. Supp. 2d 1310 (S.D. Fla. 2003) (court may infer willfulness from a defendant’s default)
- Yellow Pages Photos, Inc. v. Ziplocal, LP, 795 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2015) (willful infringement encompasses reckless disregard of infringement risk)
- Cable/Home Commc’n Corp. v. Network Prods., 902 F.2d 829 (11th Cir. 1990) (deterrence is a legitimate consideration in awarding enhanced statutory damages)
- Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517 (1994) (factors for awarding attorney’s fees in copyright cases)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) (fee petitioner bears burden to show fees are reasonable)