Kent et al v. The Los Angeles Lakers, Inc.

Filing 1

COMPLAINT KENT v. LA Lakers, Inc. against Richard C. Wolfe, darren heitner, Bobby Kent. Filing fee $ 350.00 receipt number 113C-4558894, filed by Richard C. Wolfe, darren heitner, Bobby Kent. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summon(s), # 3 Exhibit A, # 4 Exhibit B, # 5 Exhibit C)(Wolfe, Richard)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

BOBBY KENT f/k/a IRA BRANDWEIN
and HOLLBRAND MUSIC PUBLISHERS,
INC.,

Case No.

Plaintiffs,
vs.
THE LOS ANGELES LAKERS, INC.
D/B/A THE LOS ANGELES LAKERS
Defendant.
__________________________________/
COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
Plaintiffs, BOBBY KENT f/k/a IRA BRANDWEIN (“Kent”) and HOLLBRAND
MUSIC PUBLISHERS, INC., a Florida corporation (“Hollbrand”) (together, the
“Plaintiffs”), sue the Defendant, THE LOS ANGELES LAKERS, INC. D/B/A THE LOS
ANGELES LAKERS, alleging the following:
THE PARTIES
1.

Plaintiff, Kent, is a Florida resident, over the age of 18, who engages in business

in Miami-Dade and Broward Counties as a music composer and performer. Kent was known as
“Ira Brandwein” before legally changing his name to “Bobby Kent”.
2.

Plaintiff, Hollbrand, is a Florida corporation that has engaged in business in

Miami-Dade and Broward Counties as a music publisher, and which holds the copyrights to
certain compositions authored by Kent.
3.

Defendant, The Los Angeles Lakers, Inc. d/b/a The Los Angeles Lakers, is a

corporation that owns the The Los Angeles Lakers professional basketball franchise within the
175 Southwest 7th Street, Latitude One Offices, Suite 2410, Miami Florida 33130
P: 305.384.7370 • F: 305.384.7371
www.wolfelawmiami.com

National Basketball Association (“NBA”).

JURISDICTION & VENUE
4.

Subject matter jurisdiction of this Court is based upon 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and

1338(a) in that the controversy arises under the Copyright Act, which is within the exclusive
jurisdiction of federal courts pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367. Further, jurisdiction of this Court is
proper as the matter in controversy exceeds seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000.00) and the
Plaintiffs and Defendant are citizens of different states. 28 U.S.C. §§1332(a) and (c)(1).
5.

Personal jurisdiction over the Defendant is proper because the Defendant has

purposely availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities in the state of Florida, thus
invoking the benefit and protection of its laws, by (i) marketing, distributing, selling, or licensing
their merchandise to be sold in Florida, (ii) entering into contracts that are consummated and/or
performed in Florida, and (iii) conducting a sustained pattern of business in Florida by regularly
visiting Miami-Dade County to participate in commercial sporting events against the Miami Heat
NBA professional basketball franchise, and benefiting from the revenues generated from such
visits.
6.

Venue is appropriate in this Court because all parties hereto actively engage in

business in Miami-Dade County. Specifically, Kent is a resident of Miami-Dade County and
Defendant regularly conducts business in Miami-Dade County, as described in the preceding
paragraph.
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
7.

All conditions precedent to bringing this action have occurred, been performed,

have been waived or excused, would be futile and are therefore no longer required, or are no
2

175 Southwest 7th Street, Latitude One Offices, Suite 2410, Miami Florida 33130
P: 305.384.7370 • F: 305.384.7371
www.wolfelawmiami.com

longer applicable.
COMMON ALLEGATIONS TO ALL COUNTS
8.

In 1978, Kent was performing as the musical director for the National Football

League’s San Diego Chargers professional football team. Kent’s job was to create and perform
music at the Chargers’ stadium to hype, excite and/or motivate the fans at San Diego Chargers
games. During this time, together with Bernardo M. Hollman (“Hollman”), Kent created and
authored an original composition entitled “Stadium Doo Dads” (hereinafter called “Kent’s
Composition”).
9.

Beginning in 1980, Kent regularly performed Stadium Doo Dads during the San

Diego Chargers home football games.
10.

Kent and Hollbrand registered a claim of copyright with United States Copyright

Office on or about September 14, 1980, and on or about January 5, 1981 the United States
Copyright office issued a Certificate of Registration for “Stadium Doo Dads”, which was
assigned registration number PA0000100774. A true and correct printout from the United States
Copyright Office website reflecting the registration number, ownership of the copyright, and date
of creation of the aforementioned copyright is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.
11.

From 1980 until 1984, Kent, working as a musical director for the San Diego

Chargers, provided a “set list” to the television stations that covered the Chargers broadcasts
documenting the public performances of Kent’s Composition at the Chargers’ games.
12.

For a few years after 1984, Kent's former collaborator Hollman continued to serve

as musical director for the San Diego Chargers. Hollman also provided a set list to the television
stations that covered the Chargers broadcasts documenting the public performances of Kent's
Composition at San Diego Chargers games.
3

175 Southwest 7th Street, Latitude One Offices, Suite 2410, Miami Florida 33130
P: 305.384.7370 • F: 305.384.7371
www.wolfelawmiami.com

Beginning in the mid-to-late 1980s, Kent’s Composition gained widespread

13.

popularity nationwide and became a standard in all stadiums and arenas in which professional
and amateur sports Defendants performed. The operative and most commonly known part of
Kent’s Composition goes “da da da da da da…CHARGE”!1
Kent’s Composition continues to be immensely popular at the Staples Center (the

14.

arena that is home to Defendant), which regularly plays Kent’s Composition during each game,
often multiple times during the same game.
Kent’s Composition is regularly broadcasted both at the Staples Center, at which

15.

Los Angeles Lakers games take place, and also as part of the radio and/or television broadcast
aired and distributed by the broadcast networks licensed to broadcast the sporting events.
16.

Defendant has publicly performed Kent’s Composition on multiple occasions.

17.

In between May and June 2010, the Plaintiffs put the Defendant on notice that its

public performance of Kent’s Composition violated the Plaintiffs’ copyright, and that pursuant to
17 U.S.C. §§504 and 505, it was liable for statutory damages of $150,000.00 per unauthorized
use, plus attorney’s fees.
The Los Angeles Lakers acknowledged their use of Kent’s Composition and

18.

agreed to pay Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) to the Plaintiffs in exchange for a one year
license to publicly perform Kent’s Composition, as set forth in the license attached herein as
Exhibit “B”.
19.

At no time did the Plaintiffs ever grant the Defendant the right to commercially

exploit and/or publicly perform Kent’s Composition without a license.
20.

On or about March 4, 2012 at 5:06 p.m. EST during the professional basketball

1

Kent did not include the word “Charge” in his composition; it was adopted by fans at stadiums where Kent’s
Composition was played.

4

175 Southwest 7th Street, Latitude One Offices, Suite 2410, Miami Florida 33130
P: 305.384.7370 • F: 305.384.7371
www.wolfelawmiami.com

game against the Miami Heat that was broadcast on ABC, Defendant played Kent’s
Composition.
21.

As a result, upon information and belief, Defendant has willfully and intentionally

ignored Plaintiffs’ 2010 notice that Defendant was liable for statutory damages of $150,000.00
per unauthorized use of Kent’s Composition, plus attorney’s fees, and has continued to play
Kent’s Composition in violation of Plaintiffs’ copyright.
COUNT I:
COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
Plaintiffs readopt and reallege the allegations contained in paragraph 1 through 21 as if
fully stated herein.
22.

This is an action for copyright infringement.

23.

Upon information and belief, Defendant has willfully and intentionally infringed

the statutory copyright in Kent’s Composition by publicly performing Kent’s Composition
without being authorized to do so.
24.

Defendant has actual knowledge of its infringements, because it was put on notice

of the Plaintiffs’ copyright in the Kent Composition, yet it continued to publicly perform Kent’s
Composition without the Plaintiffs’ authorization and without a license to perform the
copyrighted work. For these reasons, Defendant is a willful and deliberate infringer.
25.

Attached as Exhibit “C” is a letter to the Defendant, which notified Defendant

that Kent’s Composition was a copyrighted work, that the Plaintiffs terminated their relationship
with the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (“ASCAP”), and that going
forward the infringing party would be required to purchase a license from the Plaintiffs to
continue to publicly perform the Kent Composition.
26.

The letters also enclosed a CD with a sound recording of Kent’s Composition.
5

175 Southwest 7th Street, Latitude One Offices, Suite 2410, Miami Florida 33130
P: 305.384.7370 • F: 305.384.7371
www.wolfelawmiami.com

27.

Despite having been put on notice that it was infringing on the Plaintiffs’

copyright, Defendant continued to publicly perform the Kent Composition without having
obtained a license to do so.
28.

As a result of the foregoing facts, Defendant’s infringement of Plaintiffs’

copyright is willful and continuous.
29.

Plaintiffs have been damaged and will continue to be damaged as a result of

Defendant’s willful and continuous infringement.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Kent and Hollbrand, respectfully request the following relief:
(A)

that the Defendant and it’s respective agents, representatives, and employees be

immediately, and preliminarily and permanently enjoined from infringing upon the Plaintiffs’
statutory copyright in any manner, including, but not limited to, any public performance of the
Kent Composition;
(B)

that the Defendant be required to pay statutory damages of $150,000.00 pursuant

to 17 U.S.C. §504 for each and every unauthorized public performance of the Kent Composition;
and
(C)

that the Defendant be required to pay the Plaintiffs’ reasonable attorney’s fees and

reasonable costs pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §505, and for such further relief as this Court deems just
and appropriate.
JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff demands a Jury Trial of all issues.

Dated: March 14, 2012

s/Richard C. Wolfe
Richard C. Wolfe
6

175 Southwest 7th Street, Latitude One Offices, Suite 2410, Miami Florida 33130
P: 305.384.7370 • F: 305.384.7371
www.wolfelawmiami.com