Case 3:10-cv-01900-N Document 1 Filed 09/21/10 Page 1 of 6 PageID 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION

MICK HAIG PRODUCTIONS, E.K., §

HATTINGER STR. 88 §
D-44789 BOCHUM, GERMANY, §
§
PLAINTIFF, §
§
VS. §
§
DOES 1-670 § C.A. NO.:_____________________
§
DEFENDANTS. §

PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, Mick Haig Productions, e.K., by its attorney, files this Original Complaint and

for cause, respectfully shows the court as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This is a suit for copyright infringement under the United States Copyright Act of

1976, as amended, 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq. (the “Copyright Act”). This Court has jurisdiction

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).

2. Venue in this District is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and

28 U.S.C. § 1400(a).

3. This court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because Defendants are residents

of this State, including this District, and/or because Defendants’ acts of copyright infringement

occurred in this State, including this District and Defendants should anticipate being haled into court

in this State.
 Case 3:10-cv-01900-N Document 1 Filed 09/21/10 Page 2 of 6 PageID 2

NATURE OF THE CASE

4. Defendants collectively participated, via the internet, in the unlawful reproduction and

distribution of Plaintiff’s copyrighted motion picture, “Der Gute Onkel,” by means of file transfer

technology called, BitTorrent. Defendants initiated their infringing conduct by first logging into the

one of many BitTorrent repositories known for their large index of copyrighted movies, television

shows, software and adult videos. Defendants each then obtained a reference file for Plaintiff’s

motion picture from the video index and loaded that reference file into a computer program designed

to read such files. With the reference file loaded, this BitTorrent program employed the BitTorrent

protocol to initiate simultaneous connections to hundreds of other users possessing and “sharing”

copies of the digital media described in the reference file, namely, Plaintiff’s motion picture. Once

connected, the program began coordinating the copying of Plaintiff’s film to the Defendants’

computers from the other users sharing the film. As the film was copied to the Defendants’

computers piece by piece, the downloaded pieces were immediately made available to other users

seeking to obtain the file. It is in this way that each defendant simultaneously reproduced and/or

distributed the motion picture.

PARTIES

5. Plaintiff is a motion picture production company that markets and distributes adult

entertainment videos in various media. Plaintiff brings this action to stop Defendants from copying

and distributing unauthorized copies of the adult motion picture, “Der Gute Onkel,” over the internet.

Plaintiff is both author and copyright owner of the motion picture in question and has duly

submitted an application for registration of the work. Defendants’ infringements allow them and

others to unlawfully obtain and distribute unauthorized copies of Plaintiff’s work for which Plaintiff

spent a substantial amount of time, money and effort to produce, market and distribute. Each time a
 Case 3:10-cv-01900-N Document 1 Filed 09/21/10 Page 3 of 6 PageID 3

Defendant unlawfully distributes a free copy of Plaintiff’s copyrighted motion picture to others over

the internet, particularly via BitTorrent, each recipient can then distribute that unlawful copy to

others without degradation in sound or picture quality. Thus, a Defendant’s distribution of even one

unlawful copy of a motion picture can result in the nearly instantaneous worldwide distribution of

that single copy to a limitless number of people. Plaintiff now seeks redress for this rampant

infringement of its exclusive rights in the motion picture, “Der Gute Onkel.”

6. The true names of Defendants are unknown to Plaintiff at this time. Each Defendant

is known to Plaintiff only by the Internet Protocol (“IP”) address assigned to that Defendant by his or

her Internet Service Provider on the date and at the time at which the infringing activity of each

Defendant was observed. The IP address of each Defendant thus far identified, together with the

date and time at which his or her infringing activity was observed, is included on Exhibit A hereto.

Plaintiff believes that information obtained in discovery will lead to the identification of each

Defendant’s true name and permit the Plaintiff to amend this Complaint to state the same. Plaintiff

further believes that the information obtained in discovery may lead to the identification of additional

infringing parties to be added to this Complaint as defendants, since monitoring of online

infringement of Plaintiff’s motion picture is ongoing.

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND BITTORRENT

7. Copying media with BitTorrent technology requires three principal components: (1) a

BitTorrent “client” application, (2) indexing websites known as “torrent sites” and (3) computer

servers known as BitTorrent “trackers.” Each is necessary for normal BitTorrent transfers.

8. The process works as follows: users download a small program that they install on

their computers – the BitTorrent “client” application. The BitTorrent client is the user’s interface

during the downloading/uploading process. There are many different BitTorrent clients, all of which
 Case 3:10-cv-01900-N Document 1 Filed 09/21/10 Page 4 of 6 PageID 4

are readily available on the internet for free. BitTorrent client applications typically lack the ability

to search for files. To find files available for download, users must visit torrent sites using any

standard web browser.

9. A torrent site is a website that contains an index of files being made available by other

users (generally an extensive listing of movies and television programs, among other copyrighted

content). The torrent site hosts and distributes small reference files known as “torrents.” Although

torrents do not contain actual audio/visual media, they instruct a user’s computer where to go and

how to get the desired file. Torrents interact with specific trackers, allowing the user to download

the desired file.

10. A BitTorrent tracker manages the distribution of files, connecting uploaders (those

who are distributing content) with downloaders (those who are copying the content). A tracker

directs a BitTorrent user’s computer to other users who have a particular file, and then facilitates the

download process from those users. When a BitTorrent user seeks to download a movie or television

file, he or she merely clicks on the appropriate torrent file on a torrent site, and the torrent file

instructs the client software how to connect to a tracker that will identify where the file is available

and begin downloading it.

11. Files downloaded in this method are downloaded in hundreds of individual pieces.

Each piece that is downloaded is immediately thereafter made available for distribution to other users

seeking the same file. The effect of this technology makes every downloader also an uploader of the

content. This means that every user who has a copy of the infringing material on a torrent network

must necessarily also be a source of download for that material.

CLAIMS OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

12. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1
 Case 3:10-cv-01900-N Document 1 Filed 09/21/10 Page 5 of 6 PageID 5

through 11 as if fully set forth herein.

13. The Plaintiff alleges that each Defendant, without the permission or consent of the

Plaintiff, has used, and continues to use, BitTorrent software to reproduce and/or distribute

Plaintiff’s motion picture to hundreds of other BitTorrent users. Exhibit A identifies the John Doe

Defendants known to Plaintiff as of the date of this Complaint who have, without the permission or

consent of Plaintiff, distributed the copyrighted work en masse, through a public website and any one

of various public BitTorrent trackers such as, isohunt.com, extratorrent.com, torrentuniverse.org or

torrentz.com. In doing so, Defendants have violated Plaintiff’s exclusive rights of reproduction and

distribution.

14. The foregoing acts of infringement have been willful, intentional, and in disregard of

and with indifference to the rights of Plaintiff.

15. As a result of each Defendant’s infringement of Plaintiff’s exclusive rights under

copyright, Plaintiff is entitled to relief pursuant to 17 US.C. § 504 and to its attorney’s fees and costs

pursuant to 17 US.C. § 505.

16. The conduct of each Defendant is causing and, unless enjoined and restrained by this

Court, will continue to cause Plaintiff great and irreparable injury. Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §§ 502 and

503, Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief prohibiting each Defendant from further infringing

Plaintiff’s copyright and ordering that each Defendant destroy all copies of the copyrighted motion

picture “Der Gute Onkel,” made in violation of Plaintiff’s exclusive rights to the copyright.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against each Defendant as follows:

a. For entry of preliminary and permanent injunctions providing that each Defendant

shall be enjoined from directly or indirectly infringing Plaintiff’s rights in the

copyrighted motion picture, “Der Gute Onkel.” and any motion picture, whether now
Case 3:10-cv-01900-N Document 1 Filed 09/21/10 Page 6 of 6 PageID 6

in existence or later created, that is owned, licensed to, or controlled by Plaintiff

(“Plaintiff’s Motion Pictures”), including without limitation by using the internet to

reproduce or copy Plaintiff’s Motion Pictures, to distribute Plaintiff’s Motion

Pictures, or to make Plaintiff’s Motion Pictures available for distribution to the

public, except pursuant to a lawful license or with the express authority of Plaintiff.

Defendant also shall destroy all copies of Plaintiff’s Motion Pictures that Defendant

has downloaded onto any computer hard drive or server without Plaintiff’s

authorization and shall destroy all copies of those downloaded motion pictures

transferred onto any physical medium or device in each Defendant’s possession,

custody, or control.

b. For actual damages or statutory damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504, at the election

of the Plaintiff.

c. For Plaintiff’s costs.

d. For Plaintiff’s reasonable attorney’s fees.

e. For such other and further relief as the Court deems proper.

Respectfully Submitted,

s/
Evan Stone
State Bar No. 24072371
624 W. University Dr., #386
Denton, Texas 76201
Office: 469-248-5238
Email: [email protected]