Twitch Interactive, Inc. v. Justin Johnston
5:16-cv-03404
| N.D. Cal. | Jul 26, 2019Background
- Twitch operates a video-streaming platform and owns registered trademarks TWITCH and TWITCHTV and common-law rights in its “Glitch” logo; its Terms of Service (TOS) require users to consent to Santa Clara County forum selection and prohibit automated bots and unauthorized use of trademarks.
- Defendants Eric Bouchouev and Alex Renfrow (real name Jared Kelly) operated websites selling “viewer,” “follower,” and “chat” bot services advertised using the TWITCH mark, Twitch-like colors/logos, and infringing domain names (e.g., twitch-viewerbot.com).
- Twitch served defendants via court-authorized alternative service (email/FTP); defendants did not appear and clerk’s defaults were entered; Twitch moved for default judgment against Bouchouev and Renfrow/Kelly.
- Twitch alleged claims for trademark infringement (15 U.S.C. § 1114), unfair competition (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)), ACPA cybersquatting (15 U.S.C. § 1125(d)) against Bouchouev, and breach of contract (California law);
- The court found service and personal jurisdiction adequate (TOS forum clause), amended the caption to add Jared Kelly, and entered default judgment as to liability on the Lanham Act and breach claims and cybersquatting (against Bouchouev).
- Remedies awarded: $100,077.51 (Bouchouev actual profits for Lanham Act violations), $45,000 (Bouchouev statutory ACPA damages — $15,000 per domain), $10,000 (Renfrow/Kelly statutory Lanham Act damages), permanent injunction, and attorneys’ fees/costs (subject to proof).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personal jurisdiction & service | Twitch: defendants consented to Santa Clara forum via TOS; email service complied with court order | Defendants did not appear to contest | Court enforced forum-selection clause; service by email was substantial compliance; personal jurisdiction and service upheld |
| Trademark infringement / unfair competition (Lanham Act §1114 and §1125(a)) | Twitch: owns valid marks; defendants used identical/similar marks and Twitch-like trade dress to market bots, causing likelihood of confusion | No appearance; no defense presented | Default judgment for Twitch on trademark and unfair competition — likelihood of consumer confusion found |
| Cybersquatting (ACPA §1125(d)) — Bouchouev only | Twitch: Bouchouev registered/used confusingly similar domains in bad faith to profit (multiple domains, correct mark used, intent to divert) | No appearance | Court found ACPA elements satisfied and bad faith; awarded statutory damages $15,000 per domain (total $45,000) |
| Breach of contract (TOS) and equitable relief / damages / fees | Twitch: defendants agreed to TOS, breached by using bots; monetary damages inadequate; exceptional case warranting fees | No appearance | Default judgment on breach claim; permanent injunction granted (narrowly tailored); attorneys’ fees and costs allowed as case was exceptional; damages awarded as above |
Key Cases Cited
- Lahoti v. VeriCheck, Inc., 586 F.3d 1190 (9th Cir. 2009) (trademark infringement elements)
- AMF Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1979) (likelihood-of-confusion factors)
- Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470 (9th Cir. 1986) (default-judgment factors)
- M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off–Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1 (1972) (validity/enforcement of forum-selection clauses)
- eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, LLC, 547 U.S. 388 (2006) (standard for permanent injunctions)