Fahmy v. Jay-Z et al

Filing 70

ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery), Complaint - (Discovery), Complaint - (Discovery) 1 filed by Defendant Universal Music and Video Distribution Inc.(Lewis, Alexa)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

RUSSELL J. FRACKMAN (SBN 49087)
[e-mail]
ALEXA L. LEWIS (SBN 235867)
[e-mail]
MITCHELL SILBERBERG & KNUPP LLP
11377 West Olympic Boulevard
Los Angeles, California 90064-1683
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Universal Music Group
Distribution, Corp. f/k/a Universal
Music & Video Distribution, Corp.

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION

10
11

Osama Ahmed Fahmy, an individual,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

CASE NO. CV 07-05715 CAS (PJWx)
The Honorable Christina A. Snyder

v.
Jay-Z (aka Shawn Carter), Timothy
Mosely, Kyambo Joshua, Rob Bourdon,
Brad Delson, Mike Shinoda, Dave
Farrell, Joseph Hahn, Chester
Bennington, Big Bad Mr. Hahn Music,
Chesterchaz Publishing, EMI Blackwood
Music, Inc., EMI Music Publishing Ltd.,
Kenji Kobayashi Music, Lil Lulu
Publishing, Machine Shop Recordings,
LLC, Marcy Projects Productions II,
Inc., MTV Networks Enterprises Inc.,
Nondisclosure Agreement Music,
Paramount Home Entertainment, Inc.,
Paramount Pictures Corporation, Radical
Media, Rob Bourdon Music, Roc-AFella Records, LLC, Timbaland
Productions, Inc., UMG Recordings,
Inc., Universal Music and Video
Distribution, Inc., and Warner Music
Inc.,

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT OF
DEFENDANT UNIVERSAL MUSIC
GROUP DISTRIBUTION, CORP.
F/K/A UNIVERSAL MUSIC &
VIDEO DISTRIBUTION, CORP.

Defendants.

26
27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP
1768914.1

28
29
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1

Defendant Universal Music Group Distribution, Corp. f/k/a Universal Music

2

& Video Distribution, Corp. (“Defendant”), answers the Complaint of Osama

3

Ahmed Fahmy (“Plaintiff”) as follows:

4
5

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1.

The allegations contained in paragraph 1 are legal conclusions to

6

which a response is not required. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 1 are

7

factual in nature, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

8
9

PARTIES
2.

Answering the first and second sentences of paragraph 2, Defendant

10

lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and

11

on that basis denies each and every allegation set forth therein; and answering the

12

third sentence of paragraph 2, denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

13

3.

Answering paragraph 3, Defendant admits the allegations in the first

14

sentence of paragraph 3; lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

15

of the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 3, and on that basis denies

16

each and every allegation set forth therein; and denies each and every remaining

17

allegation set forth in paragraph 3.

18

4.

Answering paragraph 4, Defendant lacks information sufficient to

19

form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and on that basis denies each and

20

every allegation set forth therein.

21

5.

Answering paragraph 5, Defendant lacks information sufficient to

22

form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and on that basis denies each and

23

every allegation set forth therein.

24

6.

Defendant admits that it is a corporate entity that has been identified in

25
26

1768914.1

Vol. 3…Life and Times of S. Carter. Answering the remaining allegations in

27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP

product packaging as having participated in the distribution of the album entitled
paragraph 6, Defendant lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

28
29

1
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1

of said allegations and on that basis denies each and every allegation set forth

2

therein.

3

7.

Answering paragraph 7, Defendant lacks information sufficient to

4

form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and on that basis denies each and

5

every allegation set forth therein.

6
7

ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS
8.

Answering the final sentence of paragraph 8, Defendant denies each

8

and every allegation set forth therein. Answering the remainder of paragraph 8,

9

Defendant lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said

10
11

allegations and on that basis denies each and every allegation set forth therein.
9.

Answering paragraph 9, Defendant lacks information sufficient to

12

form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and on that basis denies each and

13

every allegation set forth therein.

14

10.

Answering paragraph 10, Defendant lacks information sufficient to

15

form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and on that basis denies each and

16

every allegation set forth therein.

17

11.

Answering paragraph 11, Defendant lacks information sufficient to

18

form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and on that basis denies each and

19

every allegation set forth therein.

20

12.

Answering paragraph 12, Defendant admits that the album Vol.

21

3…Life and Times of S. Carter, which contains a sound recording entitled “Big

22

Pimpin,’” was released in or about December 1999. Answering the remaining

23

allegations in paragraph 12, Defendant lacks information sufficient to form a belief

24

as to the truth of said allegations and on that basis denies each and every allegation

25

set forth therein.

26

13.

27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP
1768914.1

Answering the first sentence of paragraph 13, Defendant admits that

distribution of the album Vol. 3…Life and Times of S. Carter has continued from

28
29

2
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1

its original release through the present. Defendant denies each and every

2

remaining allegation set forth in paragraph 13.

3

14.

Answering paragraph 14, Defendant lacks information sufficient to

4

form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and on that basis denies each and

5

every allegation set forth therein.

6

15.

Answering paragraph 15, Defendant lacks information sufficient to

7

form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and on that basis denies each and

8

every allegation set forth therein.

9

16.

Answering the first sentence of paragraph 16, Defendant denies each

10

and every allegation set forth therein. Answering the second sentence of paragraph

11

16, Defendant lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said

12

allegations and on that basis denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

13

17.

The allegations contained in paragraph 17 are legal conclusions to

14

which a response is not required. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 17 are

15

factual in nature, Defendant lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the

16

truth of said allegations and on that basis denies each and every allegation set forth

17

therein.

18

18.

The allegations contained in paragraph 18 are legal conclusions to

19

which a response is not required. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 18 are

20

factual in nature, Defendant lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the

21

truth of said allegations and on that basis denies each and every allegation set forth

22

therein.

23
24
25

ANSWER TO FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
19.

Answering paragraph 19, Defendant incorporates by reference its

answers to paragraphs 1 through 18 above, as if set forth in full herein.

26
27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP
1768914.1

20.

Answering paragraph 20, Defendant denies each and every allegation

set forth therein.

28
29

3
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1

21.

2

set forth therein.

3

22.

4

set forth therein.

5

23.

6

set forth therein.

7

24.

8

set forth therein.

9

25.

10

set forth therein.

11

26.

12

set forth therein.

13

27.

14

set forth therein.

15
16
17
18

Answering paragraph 21, Defendant denies each and every allegation
Answering paragraph 22, Defendant denies each and every allegation
Answering paragraph 23, Defendant denies each and every allegation
Answering paragraph 24, Defendant denies each and every allegation
Answering paragraph 25, Defendant denies each and every allegation
Answering paragraph 26, Defendant denies each and every allegation
Answering paragraph 27, Defendant denies each and every allegation
ANSWER TO SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

28.

Answering paragraph 28, Defendant incorporates by reference its

answers to paragraphs 1 through 18 above, as if set forth in full herein.
29.

The allegations contained in paragraph 29 are not directed against

19

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 29 is required. To the extent any

20

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

21

30.

The allegations contained in paragraph 30 are not directed against

22

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 30 is required. To the extent any

23

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

24

31.

The allegations contained in paragraph 31 are not directed against

25

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 31 is required. To the extent any

26

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP
1768914.1

28
29

4
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1

32.

The allegations contained in paragraph 32 are not directed against

2

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 32 is required. To the extent any

3

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

4

33.

The allegations contained in paragraph 33 are not directed against

5

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 33 is required. To the extent any

6

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

7

34.

The allegations contained in paragraph 34 are not directed against

8

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 34 is required. To the extent any

9

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

10

35.

The allegations contained in paragraph 35 are not directed against

11

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 35 is required. To the extent any

12

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

13
14
15
16

ANSWER TO THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
36.

Answering paragraph 36, Defendant incorporates by reference its

answers to paragraphs 1 through 18 above, as if set forth in full herein.
37.

The allegations contained in paragraph 37 are not directed against

17

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 37 is required. To the extent any

18

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

19

38.

The allegations contained in paragraph 38 are not directed against

20

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 38 is required. To the extent any

21

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

22

39.

The allegations contained in paragraph 39 are not directed against

23

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 39 is required. To the extent any

24

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

25

40.

The allegations contained in paragraph 40 are not directed against

26
27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP
1768914.1

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 40 is required. To the extent any
answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

28
29

5
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1

41.

The allegations contained in paragraph 41 are not directed against

2

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 41 is required. To the extent any

3

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

4

42.

The allegations contained in paragraph 42 are not directed against

5

Defendant and as such no answer to paragraph 42 is required. To the extent any

6

answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth therein.

7
8
9

ANSWER TO FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
43.

This claim for relief has been dismissed pursuant to the Court’s Order

of March 20, 2008, and as such no answer to paragraph 43 is required. To the

10

extent any answer is required, Defendant incorporates by reference its answers to

11

paragraphs 1 through 37 above, as if set forth in full herein.

12

44.

This claim for relief has been dismissed pursuant to the Court’s Order

13

of March 20, 2008, and as such no answer to paragraph 44 is required. To the

14

extent any answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth

15

therein.

16

45.

This claim for relief has been dismissed pursuant to the Court’s Order

17

of March 20, 2008, and as such no answer to paragraph 45 is required. To the

18

extent any answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth

19

therein.

20

46.

This claim for relief has been dismissed pursuant to the Court’s Order

21

of March 20, 2008, and as such no answer to paragraph 46 is required. To the

22

extent any answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth

23

therein.

24

47.

This claim for relief has been dismissed pursuant to the Court’s Order

25
26

1768914.1

extent any answer is required, Defendant denies each and every allegation set forth

27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP

of March 20, 2008, and as such no answer to paragraph 47 is required. To the
therein.

28
29

6
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1
2

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
48.

Defendant denies that Plaintiff is entitled to recover any of the

3

damages, injunctive or other relief sought in his Prayer for Relief, and denies each

4

and every allegation contained therein.

5
6

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

7

(Failure to State a Claim for Relief)

8
9

49.

The Complaint fails to state facts sufficient to state a claim upon

which relief may be granted.

10
11

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

12

(Statute of Limitations)

13
14

50.

Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the applicable

statute(s) of limitations.

15
16

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

17

(Standing)

18
19

51.

Plaintiff lacks standing to bring this action or any claim against

Defendant for the relief sought herein.

20
21

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

22

(Failure to Join Necessary and Indispensable Parties)

23

52.

The Complaint fails to name necessary or indispensable parties,

24

including persons and entities that own the allegedly infringed works, as alleged in

25

the Complaint.

26
27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP
1768914.1

28
29

7
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2

(Independent Creation)

3
4

53.

Defendant’s works were the result of Defendant’s independent

creation.

5
6

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

7

(Adequate Remedy at Law)

8
9
10

54.

Plaintiff's causes of action, and each of them, and his injunctive and

restitution remedies, are barred in light of the fact that Plaintiff has an adequate
remedy at law.

11
12

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

13

(Attorneys’ Fees Not Recoverable)

14

55.

Plaintiff is barred from any recovery of attorneys’ fees, because, in

15

bringing this action, Plaintiff has not alleged any basis upon which attorneys’ fees

16

are recoverable.

17
18

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

19

(Laches)

20
21

56.

Plaintiff is barred by the doctrine of laches from asserting any of his

claims for relief.

22
23

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

24

(Waiver)

25
26

57.

Plaintiff has, through his actions, conduct, delay, and failure to act,

waived any right to relief.

27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP
1768914.1

28
29

8
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1

TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2

(Estoppel)

3
4

58.

Plaintiff is estopped by his own acts and omissions from asserting any

claims in this action.

5
6

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

7

(De Minimis)

8
9
10

59.

To the extent any copyrightable elements from any of the allegedly

infringed works were used in allegedly infringing works and were not
independently created, such use is de minimis and not actionable.

11
12

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

13

(Authorization, License, Acquiescence, Ratification, Consent)

14

60.

To the extent any of the acts or omissions averred in the Complaint

15

occurred, those acts were authorized, licensed, acquiesced in, ratified, or consented

16

to it, expressly, by implication, or by conduct.

17
18

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

19

(Lack of Willfulness)

20
21

61.

Defendant has not willfully infringed any alleged copyright in the

Plaintiff’s purported work.

22
23

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

24

(Failure to Comply with Statutory Requirements)

25

62.

Plaintiff has failed to comply with the registration, deposit, and other

26
27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP
1768914.1

statutory requirements that are conditions precedent to maintaining this action
and/or to the recovery of statutory damages and attorneys’ fees.

28
29

9
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1

FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2

(Work for Hire)

3
4

63.

To the extent Baligh Hamdy wrote or contributed to “Khosara

Khosara,” such contribution was a work made for hire.

5
6

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

7

(Unclean Hands)

8

64.

Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands.

9
10

SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

11

(Good Faith)

12
13

65.

To the extent Defendant engaged in any act averred by Plaintiff, it did

so innocently and in good faith.

14
15

EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

16

(Lack of Originality)

17
18

66.

Plaintiff’s causes of action are barred as the portion of the Plaintiff’s

work alleged to have been infringed is not original.

19
20

NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

21

(Lack of Protectability)

22
23

67.

Plaintiff’s causes of action are barred as the portion of the Plaintiff’s

work alleged to have been infringed is not protectable.

24
25

TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

26

(Forfeiture by General Publication)

27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP
1768914.1

28
29

68.

Plaintiff’s works are in the public domain by reason of the alleged

author’s sale of said works without affixing any copyright notice thereto.
10
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1

TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2

(Fair Use)

3

69.

To the extent any copyrightable elements from the allegedly infringed

4

work was used in allegedly infringing works and were not independently created,

5

such use constituted fair use.

6
7

TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

8

(Not Copyrightable Expression)

9
10

70.

Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, because there is no

infringement of copyrightable expression.

11
12

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays:

13
14
15

1.

That Plaintiff take nothing by the Complaint, and that the Complaint,

and each claim for relief therein, be dismissed with prejudice;

16
17

2.

For Defendant’s attorneys’ fees and full costs incurred herein; and

3.

For such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

18
19
20
21
22

DATED: April 3, 2008

RUSSELL J. FRACKMAN
ALEXA L. LEWIS
MITCHELL SILBERBERG & KNUPP LLP

23
24
25
26
27
Mitchell
Silberberg &
Knupp LLP
1768914.1

By: /s/ Alexa L. Lewis
Alexa L. Lewis
Attorneys for Defendant Universal Music Group
Distribution, Corp. f/k/a Universal Music & Video
Distribution, Corp.

28
29

11
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT