Plaintiff’s Complaint for: 1. Breach of Contract; 2. Direct, Contributory, & VicariousCopyright Infringement; 3. Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; 4.Declaration of Rights as to Artwork; 5. Constructive Trust (“Complaint”), Docket No. 1 (Dec.29, 2009).
Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint for: 1. Breach of Contract; 2. Direct, Contributory,& Vicarious Copyright Infringement; 3. Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and FairDealing; 4. Declaration of Rights as to Artwork; 5. Constructive Trust (“First AmendedComplaint”), Docket No. 43 (Apr. 2, 2010).
Crispin alleges that he licensed fifteen works including Tiger with Roses, Skull withAnchor, Heart with Anchor, Skull Flags, Skull Helmet, Winged Wheel, Eagle, Black Panther,Camo Panther, Eagle Skull, Snake Skull, and Handcuffs. (
, ¶ 26, Exh. 1.) Each of theseworks has been registered with the United States Copyright Office. (
, ¶ 27.)
, ¶ 28.
, ¶¶ 29, 31.
First Amended Complaint at 2–3.
Plaintiff Buckley Crispin filed this action on December 29, 2009 against Christian Audigier, Christian Audigier, Inc. (“CAI”), and their various sublicensees.
On March 19, 2010,Crispin filed a first amended complaint.
Crispin alleges that between November 2005 andJanuary 2006, he granted Audigier and CAI an oral license to use certain of his works of art in a limited manner in connection with the manufacture of certain types of garments.
Theagreement purportedly required Audigier and CAI to pay a specified sum for the right toreproduce each work of art on street-wear apparel and also required that they include Crispin’slogo on each garment.
Crispin alleges that Audigier and CAI have not only failed to include hislogo on a substantial quantity of apparel bearing his artwork, but at times they attributed theartwork to another artist or to Audigier himself.
Crispin alleges that Audigier and CAI alsoviolated his rights by sublicensing his artwork without obtaining his consent. He asserts that theartwork has now been used on jewelry, watches, shoes, pet accessories, luggage, sunglasses,swimwear, denim, wine bottles, and a variety of other products that are purportedly outside thescope of the limited oral license.
Crispin pleads five causes of action: (1) breach of contract against CAI and Audigier;
Case 2:09-cv-09509-MMM-JEM Document 75 Filed 05/26/10 Page 2 of 37