Malibu Media, LLC v. John Doe

Filing 22

ORDER & DEFAULT JUDGMENT, granting motion 20 for default jdgmt, DEFAULT JUDGMENT ENTERED in favor of pltf & against deft in amt of $6,039.15 plus interest, consisting of... (see Paras 2a & 2b for specifics), ENJOINING deft freo infringing on pltfs' rts under federal or state law in its copyrighted works... (see Para 3 for specifics), further ENJOINING deft & ordering deft to destroy all copies of pltf's copyrighted works deft has downloaded or transferred onto any physical medium or device in deft's possession... (see Para 4 for specific details), & directing Clrk of Ct to CLOSE case. (See order for complete details.) Signed by Chief Judge Christopher C. Conner on 2/1/19. (ki)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MALIBU MEDIA, LLC,
Plaintiff
v.
MICHELLE BAYKO,
Defendant

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:18-CV-964
(Chief Judge Conner)

ORDER & JUDGMENT
AND NOW, this 1st day of February, 2019, upon consideration of the motion
(Doc. 20) for default judgment by Malibu Media, LLC (“Malibu”), wherein Malibu
seeks damages, costs, and a permanent injunction against pro se defendant Michelle
Bayko (“Bayko”) for her infringement of Malibu’s copyrighted works in violation of
the Copyright Act, see 17 U.S.C. § 501 et seq., and specifically requests statutory
damages in the amount of $1,500 per violation, for a total of $10,500; costs in the
amount of $789.15; and an order enjoining Bayko from any future infringement
and directing her to destroy all copies of Malibu’s copyrighted works now in her
possession, and it appearing that the summons and amended complaint (Doc. 12)
were served on Bayko on August 29, 2018, (see Doc. 16), but that, as of the date
of this order, Bayko has not pled or otherwise defended in this litigation, see FED.
R. CIV. P. 12, nor has counsel entered an appearance on her behalf, and it further
appearing that, that, upon request (Doc. 18) of Malibu, the Clerk of Court entered
default (Doc. 19) against Bayko on December 18, 2018, see FED. R. CIV. P. 55(a), and

the court concluding that, taking the facts in the amended complaint as true, see
DIRECTV, Inc. v. Pepe, 431 F.3d 162, 165 (3d Cir. 2005) (quoting Comdyne I, Inc.
v. Corbin, 908 F.2d 1142, 1149 (3d Cir. 1990)), Malibu’s allegations are sufficient for
default judgment purposes to establish its “ownership of a valid copyright” and
Bayko’s “copying of constituent elements of the work that are original,” Feist
Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., Inc., 499 U.S. 340, 361 (1991), to wit: that Malibu
owns valid copyrights to the seven (7) subject films identified in Exhibit A to
its amended complaint, (see Doc. 12-2), and that Bayko, without authorization,
downloaded and shared those films through her use of the BitTorrent protocol and
file distribution network, (Doc. 12 ¶¶ 3, 10, 17-24), and the court noting, with respect
to the issue of damages, that we “may conduct hearings [if] it needs to . . . determine
the amount of damages,” FED. R. CIV. P. 55(b)(2), but that we may order minimum
statutory damages in copyright infringement matters without a hearing, see Broad.
Music, Inc. v. Spring Mount Area Bavarian Resort, Ltd., 555 F. Supp. 2d 537, 54445 (E.D. Pa. 2008), and may order an amount in excess of the minimum without a
hearing when the record provides a “sufficient basis” to determine whether the
requested award is “just,” id.; see 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)(1), and the court further noting
that the Copyright Act authorizes an award, for each violation, of an amount “not
less than $750 or more than $30,000,” 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)(1), and that Malibu requests
double the minimum amount, or $1,500 per violation, for total statutory damages of
$10,500, and the court finding that the minimum statutory damages of $750 per each
violation in the matter sub judice will provide sufficient compensation to Malibu and

2

serve as an adequate deterrent to Bayko and others, particularly in view of the fact
that Bayko is not alleged or shown to have been an initial seeder of the copyrighted
works to the BitTorrent network, nor is she alleged or shown to have profited from
her infringement, see, e.g., Malibu Media, LLC v. Henry, No. 2:14-CV-830, 2015
WL 4911112, at *2-3 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 18, 2015) (awarding $750 when defendant was
not “the original user who made [Malibu’s] work available to the public” nor did
she “reap[] any profit from . . . participation in the infringement”); accord Malibu
Media, LLC v. Cui, No. 13-5897, 2014 WL 5410170, at *4 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 24, 2014); and
the court further noting, with respect to Malibu’s request for injunctive relief, that
an injunction is an authorized remedy in infringement actions when necessary “to
prevent or restrain infringement of a copyright,” 17 U.S.C. § 502(a), and that, in
assessing the propriety of an injunction in the matter sub judice, the court must
consider whether Malibu is likely to succeed on the merits; whether it will suffer
irreparable harm if an injunction does not issue; whether an injunction will result
in even greater harm to Bayko; and whether such relief serves the public interest,
see Broad. Music, Inc., 555 F. Supp. 2d at 543 (citing Shields v. Zuccarini, 254 F.3d
476, 482 (3d Cir. 2001)), and the court observing that Bayko’s default prevents a
merits assessment, but finding that Bayko will not be harmed by an injunction
preventing continued unlawful behavior; that the public interest supports such
an injunction; and that, due to the nature of the BitTorrent file-sharing protocol,
Bayko could continued to violate Malibu’s statutory rights and cause irreparable

3

harm absent the requested injunctive relief, and the court further finding that the
requested costs are reasonable, see 17 U.S.C. § 505, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1.

The motion (Doc. 20) for default judgment is GRANTED.

2.

Default judgment is ENTERED in favor of plaintiff and against
defendant in the amount of $6,039.15, plus interest, consisting of:
a.

Statutory damages in the amount of $750 for each of seven (7)
total violations, for a total of $5,250, plus interest, pursuant to 17
U.S.C. § 504(c) and 28 U.S.C. § 1961.

b.

Costs in the amount of $789.15, plus interest, pursuant to 17
U.S.C. § 505 and 28 U.S.C. § 1961.

3.

Defendant is ENJOINED from directly, contributorily, or indirectly
infringing plaintiff’s rights under federal or state law in its copyrighted
works, including, without limitation, by using the internet, BitTorrent,
or any other online media distribution system to reproduce (e.g.,
download) or distribute its copyrighted works, or to make plaintiff’s
copyrighted works available for distribution to the public, except
pursuant to a lawful license or with the express authority of plaintiff.

4.

Defendant is further ENJOINED and ordered to destroy all copies of
plaintiff’s copyrighted works that defendant has downloaded onto any
computer hard drive or server without plaintiff’s authorization, and
shall destroy all copies of the copyrighted works transferred onto any
physical medium or device in defendant’s possession, custody, or
control.

5.

The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER
Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge
United States District Court
Middle District of Pennsylvania