• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
O
NO JS-6UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTCENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIAGLEN E. FRIEDMAN,Plaintiff,v.THIERRY GUETTA a/k/a MR.BRAINWASH,Defendant. ___________________________))))))))))))))Case No. CV 10-00014 DDP (JCx)
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONFOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYINGDEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARYJUDGMENT
[Motions filed on April 4, 2011]Plaintiff Glen E. Friedman ("Plaintiff") alleges thatDefendant Thierry Guetta a.k.a Mr. Brainwash ("Defendant")infringed Plaintiff’s copyright by creating, reproducing,displaying, and selling products incorporating Plaintiff’sphotograph of the hip hop music group Run-DMC (the “Photograph”).Plaintiff and Defendant filed cross motions for summary judgment.After reviewing the papers submitted by the parties, consideringthe arguments therein, and hearing oral arguments, the court GRANTSPlaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and DENIES Defendant’sMotion for Summary Judgment.
Case 2:10-cv-00014-DDP-JC Document 65 Filed 05/27/11 Page 1 of 15 Page ID #:1100
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
2
I. Background
In 1985 Plaintiff took a picture of the famous hip hop musicgroup Run-DMC. (Compl. ¶ 12; Def.'s Statement of UncontrovertedFacts {“SUF”) 58.) The Photograph depicts the three artistsstanding shoulder-to-shoulder and wearing black stetson hats. (SeeDeclaration of Guetta (“Guetta Dec.”), Ex. B.) In 1994, Plaintiffpublished the Photograph in the book Fuck You Heroes. (Declarationof Friedman ("Friedman Dec.") ¶ 3.) In 2003, Plaintiff applied forand was issued Copyright Registration Certificate VA 1-221-001 forthe Photograph. (Friedman Dec. 3.)Defendant obtained the Photograph from the internet. (GuettaDec. ¶ 7.) Defendant did not specifically seek out the Photographor a portrait of Run-DMC, but rather, came across the Photograph bychance. (Id. 7.) No indication of a copyright existed on thePhotograph, and Defendant was not aware that the Photograph waspublished in Plaintiff's book. (Id.) Defendant, an artist, oftenincorporates pre-existing images in the creation of his artwork.(Guetta De. ¶¶ 2-4.) For purposes of the present action, it isundisputed that Defendant created at least four categories of worksthat he admits “incorporat[ed] aspects” of the Photograph. (GuettaDec. ¶¶ 6, 9, 12, 14.)1. The “Old Photo” work was made by combining a scannedphotograph of a 19th century couple with images of two of themembers of Run-DMC. (Id. 9.) The Run-DMC portion of the photocame “from the digital image of the Photograph.” (Id.) The OldPhoto Work was printed as a 22" by 30" image, and Defendant soldmultiple prints of this piece. (Id. ¶ 10.) Defendant also used
Case 2:10-cv-00014-DDP-JC Document 65 Filed 05/27/11 Page 2 of 15 Page ID #:1101
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
3
reproductions of the Old Photo Work image on free postcards handedout to attendees of his 2008 Life is Beautiful show. (Id. ¶ 11.)2. To create the “Broken Records” work, Defendant altered adigital image of the Photograph. The altered image eliminated thePhotograph’s background but left in place the outline of the Run-DMC trio. (Id. ¶ 12.) Defendant then projected this altered imageonto a large piece of wood, painted on the wood, and glued 1,000pieces of phonograph records onto the wood. (Id.) Defendant onlyproduced one copy of this piece. The Broken Records work wasdisplaying at the Life is Beautiful installation in Los Angeles andwas never offered for sale. (Id. ¶¶ 12-13.)3. To create the “Stencil” works, Defendant states that he“altered” “a digital image of the Photograph . . . so that it couldbe made into a one piece stencil . . . .” (Id. ¶ 14.) Defendantthen “placed the stencil on top of [] three canvases with differentbackgrounds and used black spray paint to superimpose the image ofRun-DMC.” (Id.) One of the Stencil Works was put on publicdisplay and none of them were offered for sale. (Id. ¶¶ 14-15.)4. The “Banner Work” was made by hand-painting a projectedaltered reproduction the Photograph onto a canvas. (Id. ¶ 16, Ex.J.) The Banner Work was sold prior to the Life is Beautiful show,but it was displayed at the show and during a three-day musicfestival in 2008 in New York. (Id. ¶ 16.) The Banner Work was alsoreproduced on postcards handed to attendees upon leaving the Lifeis Beautiful show. (Id.)On January 4, 2010, Plaintiff filed suit in federal courtalleging infringement by the Old Photo, Broken Records, Stencil,and Banner works (collectively the “Four works”) of Plaintiff’s
Case 2:10-cv-00014-DDP-JC Document 65 Filed 05/27/11 Page 3 of 15 Page ID #:1102
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...