Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 1 of 52
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION
CASE NO. ______
RICHARD H. BARNES, JR., COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR Plaintiff, JURY TRIAL v.
LAMAR D. JACKSON, LAMAR JACKSON
ENTERPRISES INCORPORATED, and RONALD DUPONT Defendants.
Plaintiff RICHARD H. BARNES, JR., by and through undersigned counsel, pursuant to the
applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of this Court, demands a trial by
jury of all claims and issues so triable, and for his Complaint against the Defendants LAMAR D.
JACKSON, LAMAR JACKSON ENTERPRISES INCORPORATED, and RONALD
DUPONT, hereby asserts and alleges as follows:
THE PARTIES
Plaintiff
1. Plaintiff Richard H. Barnes, Jr. (hereinafter “BARNES”) is a highly regarded professional
photographer and a resident of the state of New York residing at 23 Samson Street, Cortland, New
York 13045. Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 2 of 52
2. BARNES specializes in sports photography and has photographed sporting events in the
United States in a professional capacity.
3. BARNES has photographed National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”) games,
including various collegiate football games, collegiate football bowl games, collegiate basketball
games, collegiate soccer games, and collegiate lacrosse games, National Football League (“NFL”)
games, Minor League Baseball (“MiLB”) games, and NASCAR events.
4. BARNES’s photographs have been prominently featured by numerous print and digital
media outlets, including USA TODAY Sports, Sports Illustrated, National Geographic, The New
Yorker, The New York Times, and many others.
Defendant Lamar D. Jackson
5. Upon information and belief, Defendant, Lamar D. Jackson (hereinafter “JACKSON”), is a
professional athlete who is employed by the Baltimore Ravens, a franchise of the NFL.
6. Upon information and belief, JACKSON is a resident of the state of Maryland and resides
at 24 Aston Ct. Owings Mills, MD 21117.
7. Upon information and belief, JACKSON owns and/or operates multiple social media
accounts through which JACKSON uploads and displays media for fans and other members of the
public to view.
8. Upon information and belief, JACKSON created and/or controls the Facebook account
having the username “lamarjacksonofficial” (hereinafter “FACEBOOK ACCOUNT”).
2 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 3 of 52
9. Upon information and belief, JACKSON created and/or controls the Twitter account having
the username “Lj_era8” (hereinafter “TWITTER ACCOUNT”).
10. Upon information and belief, JACKSON created and/or controls the Instagram account
having the username “new_era8” (hereinafter “INSTAGRAM ACCOUNT”).
11. Upon information and belief, JACKSON created and/or controls the YouTube channel
titled “Lamar Jackson” and accessible at the URL
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtVU05SXwMQpBdA4diEUpGg (hereinafter “YOUTUBE
CHANNEL”).
12. Upon information and belief, JACKSON uploads and displays photographs, video
recordings, and other works to the FACEBOOK ACCOUNT.
13. Content uploaded to the FACEBOOK ACCOUNT can be viewed by members of the
public at the URL https://www.facebook.com/lamarjacksonofficial/ (hereinafter “FACEBOOK
PAGE”).
14. A printed version of the FACEBOOK PAGE, as retrieved on November 2, 2018, is attached
hereto as EXHIBIT 1.
15. Upon information and belief, JACKSON uploads and displays photographs, video
recordings, and other works to the TWITTER ACCOUNT.
16. Content uploaded to the TWITTER ACCOUNT can be viewed by members of the public
at the URL https://twitter.com/lj_era8 (hereinafter “TWITTER PAGE”).
3 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 4 of 52
17. A printed version of the TWITTER PAGE, as retrieved on October 1, 2018, is attached
hereto as EXHIBIT 2.
18. Upon information and belief, JACKSON uploads and displays photographs, video
recordings, and other works to the INSTAGRAM ACCOUNT.
19. Content uploaded to the INSTAGRAM ACCOUNT can be viewed by members of the
public at the URL https://www.instagram.com/new_era8/?hl=en (hereinafter “INSTAGRAM
PAGE”).
20. A printed version of the INSTAGRAM PAGE, as retrieved on October 1, 2018, is attached
hereto as EXHIBIT 3.
21. Upon information and belief, JACKSON uploads and displays video recordings and other
works to the YOUTUBE CHANNEL.
22. A printed version of the YOUTUBE CHANNEL, as retrieved on April 5, 2019, is attached
hereto as EXHIBIT 4.
23. Upon information and belief, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON,
copied, published, displayed, distributed, created derivative works of, modified, offered for sale,
and/or sold unauthorized copies of one or more of BARNES’s photographs that are protected by
the Copyright Act of 1976 and are the subject of this litigation.
Defendant Lamar Jackson Enterprises Incorporated
24. LAMAR JACKSON ENTERPRISES INCORPORATED (“ENTERPRISES”) is a for-
profit corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Florida.
4 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 5 of 52
25. ENTERPRISES has the principal address of 1557 N. Dixie Highway 4, Pompano Beach,
Florida 33060, which is its principal place of business.
26. Upon information and belief, JACKSON is the President of ENTERPRISES.
27. Upon information and belief, individuals other than JACKSON are also involved in
conducting the affairs of ENTERPRISES.
28. Upon information and belief, ENTERPRISES owns and/or operates ERA 8 APPAREL
(“APPAREL”), a retail merchandise business with a contact address of 121 SW 7th Avenue, Boynton
Beach, Florida 33435.
29. Upon information and belief, ENTERPRISES created, had created, and/or controls the
online retail store for APPAREL that is accessible by members of the public at the URL
https://era8apparel.com/ (hereinafter “APPAREL.COM”).
30. Upon information and belief, APPAREL.COM includes a link to the FACEBOOK
ACCOUNT under the heading “FOLLOW US.”
31. Upon information and belief, APPAREL.COM includes a link to the TWITTER
ACCOUNT under the heading “FOLLOW US.”
32. Upon information and belief, APPAREL.COM includes a link to the INSTAGRAM
ACCOUNT under the heading “FOLLOW US.”
33. Upon information and belief, APPAREL.COM includes a link to the YouTube
ACCOUNT under the heading “FOLLOW US.”
5 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 6 of 52
34. Upon information and belief, ENTERPRISES displays and offers for sale apparel and other
merchandise on APPAREL.COM.
35. Upon information and belief, ENTERPRISES offers for sale through APPAREL.COM
merchandise, including apparel, fashion accessories such as hats and bags, smartphone accessories,
and/or other merchandise.
36. A printed version of a page from APPAREL.COM, as retrieved on November 2, 2018, is
attached hereto as EXHIBIT 5.
37. Upon information and belief, ENTERPRISES created, displayed, published, offered for
sale, and/or sold one or more products through APPAREL.COM that include unauthorized
derivative works of one or more of BARNES’S photographs that are protected by the copyright law
of the United States and are the subject of this litigation.
Defendant Ronald Dupont
38. Upon information and belief, Defendant RONALD DUPONT (hereinafter “DUPONT”),
is a jeweler who operates under the Stacks Custom Jewelry store in Miami, Florida.
39. Upon information and belief, DUPONT is a resident of the state of Florida and operates
his Stacks Custom Jewelry store at 17 E Flagler, Miami, Florida 33132.
40. Upon information and belief, DUPONT owns and/or operates multiple social media
accounts through which DUPONT uploads and displays content for customers, prospective
customers, and other members of the public to view.
6 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 7 of 52
41. Upon information and belief, DUPONT created and/or controls the Instagram account
having the username “stackscustoms” (hereinafter “STACKS INSTAGRAM ACCOUNT”).
42. Upon information and belief, DUPONT uploads and displays photographs, video
recordings, and other works to the STACKS INSTAGRAM ACCOUNT.
43. Content uploaded to the INSTAGRAM ACCOUNT can be viewed by members of the
public at the URL https://www.instagram.com/stackscustoms/?hl=en (hereinafter “STACKS
INSTAGRAM PAGE”).
44. A printed version of the STACKS INSTAGRAM PAGE, as retrieved on February 9, 2021,
is attached hereto as EXHIBIT 39.
45. Upon information and belief, DUPONT created, displayed, published, offered for sale,
and/or sold one or more derivative works of one or more of BARNES’S photographs that are
protected by the copyright law of the United States and are the subject of this litigation.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
46. Jurisdiction for BARNES’s claims lies with the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Florida pursuant to the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. §§ 101, et seq., 28 U.S.C. §
1331 (conferring original jurisdiction “of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or
treaties of the United States”); 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a) (conferring original jurisdiction over claims arising
under any Act of Congress relating to copyrights); 18 U.S.C. § 1964(a) (conferring original
jurisdiction over claims arising under 18 U.S.C. § 1962).
7 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 8 of 52
47. Jurisdiction for BARNES’s claims also lies with the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Florida pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332(a)(1) (conferring original jurisdiction over
claims arising between citizens of different states).
48. Defendant JACKSON is subject to personal jurisdiction in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(b) and the Florida
Long Arm Statute, Fla. Stat. § 48.193(1) and (2), because JACKSON is engaged in substantial and
not isolated activity within the state of Florida, specifically, through ENTERPRISES.
49. Defendant ENTERPRISES is subject to personal jurisdiction in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Florida because ENTERPRISES is organized under the laws of
the State of Florida, is principal place of business is located in Palm Beach County, and it transacts
business or performs work in the state of Florida.
50. Defendant DUPONT is subject to personal jurisdiction in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida because DUPONT resides in the State of Florida and transacts
business and performs work in the state of Florida, specifically, through STACKS CUSTOM.
51. Specific jurisdiction over JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, and DUPONT exists in accordance
with Section 48.193(1)(a)(1) and (2), Florida Statutes, because during the relevant time period
JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, and DUPONT: (1) operated, conducted, engaged in, and/or carried
on a business in the State of Florida; (2) maintained offices and/or agents in the State of Florida; and
(3) committed tortious acts within the State of Florida.
52. General jurisdiction exists over JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, and DUPONT in accordance
with Section 48.193(2), Florida Statutes, because JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, and DUPONT
8 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 9 of 52
engaged in substantial and not isolated activity within the State of Florida during the relevant time
period. Further, JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, and DUPONT have sufficient minimum contacts
with the State of Florida — including continuous, extensive, systematic, and pervasive business
contacts with Florida — such that (1) they should reasonably anticipate being haled into court in
Florida and (2) maintenance of this lawsuit against JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, and DUPONT
would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
53. More specifically, during the relevant time period, JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, and
DUPONT: (1) routinely and directly communicated with and supervised individuals who were
domiciled in, and resided and worked in, the State of Florida; (2) directed their activities in Florida
by contracting with individuals domiciled in State of Florida; (3) employed individuals in the State
of Florida to conduct their business; (4) routinely solicited and engaged in business with Florida
residents by: (a) communicating with them; (b) publishing and distributing to them BARNES’s
copyright-protected photographs; and (c) offering to sell and selling to them products derived from
BARNES’s copyright-protected photographs; and (5) infringed BARNES’s copyrights, violated 17
U.S.C. § 1202, violated 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c),(d), and violated Section 895.03(3), Florida Statutes, by
copying, publishing, distributing, and/or otherwise using or exploiting BARNES’s copyright-
protected photographs in the State of Florida.
54. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) since the alleged misconduct by
JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, and DUPONT that gives rise to the claims asserted herein occurred
in this District, and under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(a) since JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, and DUPONT
infringed BARNES’s copyrights in this District and do business in this District.
9 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 10 of 52
55. ENTERPRISES is deemed to reside in the Southern District of Florida because its contacts
with this District would be sufficient to subject it to personal jurisdiction in this District if it were a
separate State pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(d).
56. Venue is proper in this Court under 18 U.S.C. § 1965(a) because JACKSON,
ENTERPRISES, and DUPONT reside, can be found, have an agent, or transact their affairs in this
District.
FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS
57. BARNES is a professional photographer that photographs sporting events and licenses his
photographs to earn a living.
58. BARNES specializes in creating sports-related photography primarily related to or involving
collegiate and professional sports teams, games, and events, such as National Collegiate Athletic
Association (“NCAA”) games, including various collegiate football games, collegiate football bowl
games, collegiate basketball games, collegiate soccer games, and collegiate lacrosse games, National
Football League (“NFL”) games, Minor League Baseball (“MiLB”) games, and motorsport events,
including NASCAR events.
59. BARNES regularly attends sporting events at the request of various news outlets to
photograph the events.
60. BARNES owns vast collections of photographs he created during the events he attends,
including events involving JACKSON.
61. A list of BARNES’s photographs that are the subject of this litigation is attached as EXHIBIT
6.
10 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 11 of 52
62. BARNES’s copyrights in and to the photographs listed in EXHIBIT 6 that are the subject
of this litigation have been registered with the United States Copyright Office. (See EXHIBITS 12-
13.)
63. All of the photographs listed in EXHIBIT 6 that are the subject of this litigation were created
by BARNES and BARNES solely owns all copyrights in and to the photographs.
64. BARNES previously made each of the photographs listed in EXHIBIT 6 available for
licensing through a news outlet.
65. Despite never having obtained a license or valid permission to use any of the photographs
listed in EXHIBIT 6 for any purpose, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON,
copied, published, displayed, distributed, created derivative works of, modified, and/or sold copies
of each of the photographs through at least one or each of his INSTAGRAM PAGE, FACEBOOK
PAGE, TWITTER PAGE, YOUTUBE CHANNEL, or on APPAREL.COM for JACKSON’s
own benefit and financial gain, as described in more detail herein.
66. At the request of a news outlet, BARNES attended the September 9, 2016 NCAA football
game between the University of Louisville and Syracuse University as a credentialed professional
photographer.
67. During the September 9, 2016 game between the University of Louisville and Syracuse
University, BARNES created various photographs of JACKSON, who at the time was a University
of Louisville college athlete.
11 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 12 of 52
68. BARNES created a first photograph of JACKSON during the September 9, 2016 game
between the University of Louisville and Syracuse University, a copy of which is attached hereto as
EXHIBIT 7 (hereinafter “First Hurdle Photograph”).
69. BARNES created a second photograph of JACKSON during the September 9, 2016 game
between the University of Louisville and Syracuse University, a copy of which is attached hereto as
EXHIBIT 8 (hereinafter “Second Hurdle Photograph”).
70. BARNES created a third photograph of JACKSON during the September 9, 2016 game
between the University of Louisville and Syracuse University, a copy of which is attached hereto as
EXHIBIT 9 (hereinafter "Running With The Football Photograph”).
71. BARNES created a fourth photograph of JACKSON during the September 9, 2016 game
between the University of Louisville and Syracuse University, a copy of which is attached hereto as
EXHIBIT 10 (hereinafter “Crossing The Goal Line Photograph”).
72. BARNES created a fifth photograph of JACKSON during the September 9, 2016 game
between the University of Louisville and Syracuse University, a copy of which is attached hereto as
EXHIBIT 11 (hereinafter “Touchdown Photograph”).
73. BARNES’s copyright in and to each of the First Hurdle Photograph, Running With The
Football Photograph, Crossing The Goal Line Photograph, and Touchdown Photograph is the
subject of this litigation and was registered with the United States Copyright Office on December 6,
2016, under registration number VA 2-047-612 (a copy of the registration is attached hereto as
EXHIBIT 12).
12 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 13 of 52
74. BARNES’s copyright in and to the Second Hurdle Photograph is the subject of this litigation
and was registered with the United States Copyright Office on October 31, 2016, under registration
number VA 2-066-532 (a copy of the registration is attached hereto as EXHIBIT 13).
75. Each of the First Hurdle Photograph, Second Hurdle Photograph, Running With The
Football Photograph, Crossing The Goal Line Photograph, and Touchdown Photograph at issue in
this litigation was created solely by BARNES, and BARNES solely owns all copyrights in and to
these photographs.
76. BARNES posted to a news outlet searchable archive a version of the First Hurdle
Photograph bearing a watermark on the bottom portion of the photograph that reads “© 2016 Rich
Barnes – USA TODAY Sports” (hereinafter “BARNES’s Watermark”). (See EXHIBIT 14).
77. BARNES posted to a news outlet searchable archive a version of the Second Hurdle
Photograph bearing the BARNES’s Watermark on the bottom portion of the photograph. (See
EXHIBIT 15).
78. BARNES posted to a news outlet searchable archive a version of the Running With The
Football Photograph bearing the BARNES’s Watermark on the bottom portion of the photograph.
(See EXHIBIT 16).
79. BARNES posted to a news outlet searchable archive a version of the Crossing The Goal
Line Photograph bearing the BARNES’s Watermark on the bottom portion of the photograph. (See
EXHIBIT 17).
13 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 14 of 52
80. BARNES posted to a news outlet searchable archive a version of the Touchdown
Photograph bearing the BARNES’s Watermark on the bottom portion of the photograph. (See
EXHIBIT 18).
81. BARNES made each of the First Hurdle Photograph, Second Hurdle Photograph, Running
With The Football Photograph, Crossing The Goal Line Photograph, and Touchdown Photograph
available for licensing through a news outlet.
82. JACKSON never obtained a license to use any of the First Hurdle Photograph, Second
Hurdle Photograph, Running With The Football Photograph, Crossing The Goal Line Photograph,
or Touchdown Photograph from the news outlet.
83. ENTERPRISES never obtained a license to use any of the First Hurdle Photograph, Second
Hurdle Photograph, Running With The Football Photograph, Crossing The Goal Line Photograph,
or Touchdown Photograph from the news outlet.
84. DUPONT never obtained a license to use any of the First Hurdle Photograph, Second
Hurdle Photograph, Running With The Football Photograph, Crossing The Goal Line Photograph,
or Touchdown Photograph from the news outlet.
85. BARNES has never granted a license or permission to use any of the First Hurdle
Photograph, Second Hurdle Photograph, Running With The Football Photograph, Crossing The
Goal Line Photograph, or Touchdown Photograph to JACKSON.
86. BARNES has never granted a license or permission to use any of the First Hurdle
Photograph, Second Hurdle Photograph, Running With The Football Photograph, Crossing The
Goal Line Photograph, or Touchdown Photograph to ENTERPRISES.
14 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 15 of 52
87. BARNES has never granted a license or permission to use any of the First Hurdle
Photograph, Second Hurdle Photograph, Running With The Football Photograph, Crossing The
Goal Line Photograph, or Touchdown Photograph to DUPONT.
88. On September 10, 2016, one day after BARNES created each of the photographs that are
the subject of this litigation, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, posted
an unauthorized derivative work on JACKSON’s INSTAGRAM PAGE displaying and using the
Second Hurdle Photograph and the Running With The Football Photograph. (See EXHIBIT 19).
89. The unauthorized derivative work shown in EXHIBIT 19 received at least 5,716 likes on
JACKSON's INSTAGRAM PAGE.
90. On November 9, 2016, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON,
posted an unauthorized derivative work on JACKSON’s INSTAGRAM PAGE displaying and using
the Touchdown Photograph. (See EXHIBIT 20).
91. The unauthorized derivative work shown in EXHIBIT 20 received at least 31,101 likes on
JACKSON's INSTAGRAM PAGE.
92. On December 12, 2016, JACKSON appeared on the “Dan Patrick Show” where JACKSON
and Dan Patrick discussed BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph (hereinafter “INTERVIEW”
and accessible at the URL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiHdCjMN5wc&t=7m43s).
93. Starting at seven minutes and forty-three seconds of the INTERVIEW, JACKSON
acknowledges BARNES and BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph in which JACKSON states
that he “owes it to the great photographer.”
15 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 16 of 52
94. On December 18, 2016, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON,
posted an unauthorized use of BARNES’s Crossing The Goal Line Photograph on JACKSON’s
INSTAGRAM PAGE by displaying and using the Crossing The Goal Line Photograph. (See
EXHIBIT 21).
95. The unauthorized derivative work shown in EXHIBIT 21 received at least 41,850 likes on
JACKSON's INSTAGRAM PAGE.
96. On February 13, 2018, JACKSON filed a United States Trademark Registration Application
Serial Number: 87/796,367 (hereinafter “LEAP TRADEMARK”). The mark contained in this
application was copied using BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph. (See EXHIBITS 22 and 23).
97. On April 6, 2018, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, created a
video recording titled “Lamar Jackson: Road To The Draft (Part I)” in which JACKSON, or
someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, uploaded and posted said video recording to
JACKSON’s YOUTUBE CHANNEL (hereinafter “DRAFT VIDEO” and accessible at the URL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzCixUMo8us&t=7s ).
98. During the DRAFT VIDEO, JACKSON is shown wearing a clothing article displaying and
using an unauthorized derivative work that displays and uses BARNES’s Second Hurdle
Photograph. (See EXHIBIT 24).
99. On April 16, 2018, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, uploaded
the DRAFT VIDEO to JACKSON’s FACEBOOK PAGE.
100. On April 18, 2018, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, uploaded
the DRAFT VIDEO to JACKSON’s TWITTER PAGE.
16 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 17 of 52
101. The DRAFT VIDEO shown in EXHIBIT 24 received at least 43,224 views on JACKSON's
YOUTUBE CHANNEL.
102. The LEAP TRADEMARK displaying BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph was
published in the Trademark Official Gazette on July 3, 2018, and a Notice of Allowance issued on
August 28, 2018. (See EXHIBITS 22 and 23).
103. Upon information and belief, after July 3, 2018, JACKSON, or someone acting at the
direction of JACKSON, and/or ENTERPRISES created an unauthorized derivative work of
BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph by using the LEAP TRADEMARK.
104. Upon information and belief, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON,
and/or ENTERPRISES displayed, distributed, offered for sale, and/or sold the LEAP
TRADEMARK on APPAREL.COM by displaying the LEAP TRADEMARK on APPAREL
merchandise, including apparel, backpacks, smartphone accessories, kitchen accessories, and/or
other merchandise displaying the LEAP TRADEMARK. (See EXHIBIT 25).
105. Upon information and belief, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON,
and/or ENTERPRISES displayed and used the LEAP TRADEMARK on APPAREL.COM in
which the LEAP TRADEMARK is located at the top left-hand corner of APPAREL.COM. (See
EXHIBIT 26).
106. Upon information and belief, DUPONT, or someone acting at the direction of DUPONT,
created a sculptural version of BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph without BARNES’s
permission (“STACKS JEWELRY”). Upon information and belief, this derivative work was
solicited by JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES.
17 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 18 of 52
107. Upon information and belief, DUPONT, or someone acting at the direction of DUPONT,
created photographs of the STACKS JEWELRY.
108. Upon information and belief, on approximately August 28, 2018, DUPONT, or someone
acting at the direction of DUPONT, posted the photographs of the unauthorized STACKS
JEWELRY on the STACKS INSTAGRAM PAGE. (See EXHIBIT 37).
109. The unauthorized creation of the STACKS JEWELRY and the photography depicting the
same shown in EXHIBIT 37 received at least 4,700 likes on the STACKS INSTAGRAM PAGE.
110. On September 1, 2018, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON,
posted an unauthorized use of BARNES’s First Hurdle Photograph on JACKSON’s INSTAGRAM
PAGE by displaying and using the First Hurdle Photograph. (See EXHIBIT 27).
111. The unauthorized use of BARNES’s First Hurdle Photograph shown in EXHIBIT 27
received at least 112,082 likes on JACKSON's INSTAGRAM PAGE.
112. On January 7, 2019, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, retweeted
a Twitter post on JACKSON’s TWITTER PAGE that included an unauthorized use of BARNES’s
Second Hurdle Photograph uploaded by Live Feed Louisville (Twitter username: “LiveFeedLville”).
(See EXHIBIT 28).
113. A cease and desist letter was sent to JACKSON at JACKSON’s Maryland residence on
January 18, 2019, and was received at JACKSON’s Maryland residence on January 21, 2019
(hereinafter “FIRST LETTER”). A proof of delivery is attached as EXHIBIT 29.
114. Upon information and belief, JACKSON failed to respond to the FIRST LETTER by the
specified response date of January 31, 2019.
18 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 19 of 52
115. Upon information and belief, JACKSON received and/or was notified of the FIRST
LETTER since JACKSON removed BARNES’s First Hurdle Photograph from JACKSON’S
INSTAGRAM PAGE between January 21, 2019, and February 22, 2019 (see EXHIBITS 30A
30B). EXHIBIT 30A shows JACKSON’s INSTAGRAM PAGE before the FIRST LETTER was
delivered on January 21, 2019, in which the First Hurdle Photograph is present. EXHIBIT 30B
shows JACKSON’s INSTAGRAM PAGE after the FIRST LETTER was delivered on January 21,
2019, in which the First Hurdle Photograph is removed.
116. On February 14, 2019, JACKSON filed a second United States Trademark Registration
Application Serial Number: 88/301,276 (hereinafter “ERA 8 TRADEMARK”) after the FIRST
LETTER was sent to JACKSON (see EXHIBIT 31).
117. Upon information and belief, JACKSON received and/or was notified of the FIRST
LETTER since JACKSON, or someone at the direction of JACKSON, and/or ENTERPRISES
removed the LEAP TRADEMARK from APPAREL.COM and replaced the LEAP
TRADEMARK from APPAREL.COM with the ERA 8 TRADEMARK between January 21, 2019,
and February 22, 2019 (see EXHIBIT 32).
118. Upon information and belief, JACKSON, or someone at the direction of JACKSON,
received and/or was notified of the FIRST LETTER since JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES
removed the LEAP TRADEMARK from each and every APPAREL product offered for sale on
APPAREL.COM and replaced the LEAP TRADEMARK on these products with the ERA 8
TRADEMARK between January 21, 2019, and February 22, 2019 (see EXHIBIT 33).
19 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 20 of 52
119. A second cease and desist letter was sent to JACKSON at JACKSON’s residence on
February 26, 2019, and was received at JACKSON’s residence on February 28, 2019 (hereinafter
“SECOND LETTER”). A proof of delivery is attached as EXHIBIT 34.
120. Upon information and belief, JACKSON failed to respond to the SECOND LETTER by
the specified response date of March 15, 2019, stated in the SECOND LETTER.
121. On June 8, 2019, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, retweeted
a Twitter post on JACKSON’s TWITTER PAGE that included an unauthorized use of BARNES’s
Second Hurdle Photograph uploaded by Lincoln BIO (Twitter username: “SamlamStevens”) (see
EXHIBIT 35).
122. On August 17, 2019, JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON,
retweeted a Twitter post on JACKSON’s TWITTER PAGE that included an unauthorized use of
BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph uploaded by Carte Blanche (Twitter username:
“G0dGiven”). (See EXHIBIT 36).
123. Despite never having obtained a license or valid permission to use each of BARNES’s First
Hurdle Photograph, Second Hurdle Photograph, Running With The Football Photograph, Crossing
The Goal Line Photograph, or Touchdown Photograph for any purpose, JACKSON, or someone
at the direction of JACKSON, copied, published, displayed, distributed, created derivative works
using, modified, and/or sold copies of BARNES’s First Hurdle Photograph, Second Hurdle
Photograph, Running With The Football Photograph, Crossing The Goal Line Photograph, and
Touchdown Photograph for his own benefit and financial gain through at least one or both
JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES.
20 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 21 of 52
124. JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, copied, published, and/or
displayed BARNES’s First Hurdle Photograph on JACKSON’s INSTAGRAM PAGE for
JACKSON’s own benefit and financial gain.
125. JACKSON, or someone at the direction of JACKSON, copied, published, and/or displayed
an unauthorized derivative work of BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph on JACKSON
INSTAGRAM PAGE for JACKSON’s own benefit and financial gain.
126. JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, and/or ENTERPRISES
created and/or sold merchandise including apparel, backpacks, smartphone accessories, kitchen
accessories, and/or other merchandise that included BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph
through at least APPARAL.COM.
127. JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, copied, published, and/or
displayed an unauthorized derivative work of BARNES’s Running With The Football Photograph
on JACKSON’s INSTAGRAM PAGE for JACKSON’s own benefit and financial gain.
128. JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, copied, published, and/or
displayed BARNES’s Crossing The Goal Line Photograph on JACKSON’s INSTAGRAM PAGE
for JACKSON’s own benefit and financial gain.
129. JACKSON, or someone acting at the direction of JACKSON, copied, published, and/or
displayed an unauthorized derivative work of BARNES’s Touchdown Photograph on JACKSON’s
INSTAGRAM PAGE for JACKSON’s own benefit and financial gain.
130. Because information regarding the full scope of JACKSON’s use for each of BARNES’s
First Hurdle Photograph, Second Hurdle Photograph, Running With The Football Photograph,
21 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 22 of 52
Crossing The Goal Line Photograph, and Touchdown Photograph remains in the sole possession
of JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES, BARNES has not been able to ascertain the full scope of
JACKSON’s and/or ENTERPRISES’s infringing activities.
131. BARNES has been able to ascertain and obtain proof of certain infringements committed
by JACKSON by visiting JACKSON’s INSTAGRAM PAGE, as shown in EXHIBITS 4, 19
through 21, and 27.
132. Attached hereto as EXHIBITS 4, 19 through 21, and 27 are screen captures from
JACKSON’s INSTAGRAM PAGE setting forth the currently available proof of JACKSON’s
unlicensed and infringing uses of BARNES’s First Hurdle Photograph, Second Hurdle Photograph,
Running With The Football Photograph, Crossing The Goal Line Photograph, and Touchdown
Photograph to which BARNES owns all copyrights.
133. The unauthorized and infringing uses identified in EXHIBITS 4, 19 through 21, and 27 are
intended merely to demonstrate the currently known uses of BARNES’s photographs by
JACKSON.
134. EXHIBITS 4, 19 through 21, and 27 are, therefore, illustrative only and are not intended to
represent the full scope of JACKSON’s infringements.
135. Upon information and belief, a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and
discovery will yield evidence that JACKSON’s unauthorized, unlicensed, and/or infringing use and
exploitation of BARNES photographs is not limited to the uses identified in EXHIBITS 4, 19
through 21, and 27.
22 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 23 of 52
136. BARNES has been able to ascertain and obtain proof of certain infringements committed
by JACKSON by visiting JACKSON’s FACEBOOK PAGE, TWITTER PAGE, and YOUTUBE
CHANNEL, as shown in EXHIBITS 28, 35, 36, and 24.
137. Attached hereto as EXHIBITS 28, 35, 36, and 24 are screen captures from JACKSON’s
TWITTER PAGE and YOUTUBE CHANNEL setting forth the currently available proof of
JACKSON’s unlicensed and infringing uses of BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph to which
BARNES owns all copyrights.
138. The allegations and exhibits detailing Defendants’ infringing conduct are illustrative and are
not intended to represent the full scope of Defendants’ infringements.
139. BARNES has been able to ascertain and obtain proof of certain infringements committed
by JACKSON by visiting the United States Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Electronic
Search System website (hereinafter “Search System”) and viewing JACKSON’s Trademark, as
shown in EXHIBITS 22 and 23.
140. Attached hereto as EXHIBITS 22 and 23 are screen captures and an electronic mail
document from the Search System and the United States Patent and Trademark Office setting forth
the currently available proof of JACKSON’s unlicensed and infringing uses of BARNES’S Second
Hurdle Photograph to which BARNES owns all copyrights.
141. BARNES has been able to ascertain and obtain proof of certain infringements committed
by JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES by visiting and viewing APPAREL.COM, as shown in
EXHIBITS 5, 25, and 26.
23 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 24 of 52
142. Attached hereto as EXHIBITS 5, 25, and 26 are screen captures from APPAREL.COM
providing illustrative examples of JACKSON’s and/or ENTERPRISES’s unlicensed and infringing
uses of BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph to which BARNES owns all copyrights.
143. Neither JACKSON nor ENTERPRISES has ever had a valid license, authorization, or
permission to use, copy, publish, display, sell, or create derivative works using copies of BARNES’s
First Hurdle Photograph.
144. Neither JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, nor DUPONT has ever had a valid license,
authorization, or permission to use, copy, publish, display, sell, or create derivative works using
BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph.
145. JACKSON has never had a valid license, authorization, or permission to copy, publish,
display, sell, modify, or create derivative works using copies of BARNES’s Running With The
Football Photograph.
146. JACKSON has never had a valid license, authorization, or permission to copy, publish,
display, sell, modify, or create derivative works using copies of BARNES’s Crossing The Goal Line
Photograph.
147. JACKSON has never had a valid license, authorization, or permission to copy, publish,
display, sell, modify, or create derivative works using copies of BARNES’s Touchdown Photograph.
148. Neither JACKSON nor ENTERPRISES has ever had a valid license, authorization, or
permission to distribute, transfer, or sell copies of BARNES’s First Hurdle Photograph to third
parties for any reason.
24 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 25 of 52
149. Neither JACKSON nor ENTERPRISES has ever had a valid license, authorization, or
permission to distribute, transfer, or sell copies of BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph to third
parties for any reason.
150. JACKSON has never had a valid license, authorization, or permission to distribute, transfer,
or sell copies of BARNES’s Running With The Football Photograph to third parties for any reason.
151. JACKSON has never had a valid license, authorization, or permission to distribute, transfer,
or sell copies of BARNES’s Crossing The Goal Line Photograph to third parties for any reason.
152. JACKSON has never had a valid license, authorization, or permission to distribute, transfer,
or sell copies of BARNES’s Touchdown Photograph to third parties for any reason.
153. Neither JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, nor DUPONT has ever had a valid license,
authorization, or permission to use or display BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph in connection
with the sale or marketing of apparel, backpacks, smartphone accessories, kitchen accessories,
jewelry, sculptures, or any other commercial products.
154. Any and all exercises of any rights under Section 106 of the Copyright Act with respect to
BARNES’s First Hurdle Photograph, Second Hurdle Photograph, Running With The Football
Photograph, Crossing the Goal Line Photograph, and Touchdown Photograph by JACKSON,
ENTERPRISES, and/or DUPONT were unauthorized and infringe BARNES’s copyrights.
155. On January 18, 2019, counsel for BARNES wrote to Mr. Jackson concerning the
infringement of BARNES’s copyrights by JACKSON and ENTERPRISES.
156. In view of Mr. Jackson’s failure to respond to counsel’s initial letter, a second letter was sent
on February 26, 2019. No response was received to this letter either.
25 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 26 of 52
157. On February 19, 2021, counsel sent a third letter to JACKSON and ENTERPRISES both
directly and to ENTERPRISES’s intellectual property counsel. The February 19, 2021 letter
attached both BARNES’s draft complaint and his previous letters to JACKSON and
ENTERPRISES. See EXHIBIT 40.
158. On March 29, 2021, counsel for JACKSON and ENTERPRISES responded to the
February 19, 2021 letter by denying liability and baselessly threatening BARNES’s counsel with Rule
11 sanctions in the event they proceeded to file BARNES’s complaint. See EXHIBIT 41.
COUNT I FIRST HURDLE PHOTOGRAPH COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
159. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
160. BARNES created and owns all copyrights in and to the First Hurdle Photograph identified
in EXHIBIT 13.
161. BARNES’s copyright in and to the First Hurdle Photograph has been registered with the
United States Copyright Office, as reflected in EXHIBIT 13.
162. JACKSON has copied, published, distributed, and/or otherwise used or exploited the First
Hurdle Photograph identified in EXHIBIT 8 without permission or authorization.
163. JACKSON infringed BARNES’s copyright by copying, publishing, distributing, and/or
otherwise using BARNES’s copyrighted creative work without a license or permission as set forth
more fully above.
26 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 27 of 52
164. JACKSON’s unauthorized use of BARNES’s copyrighted work was willful, intentional,
and/or reckless.
165. As a result of JACKSON’s acts, BARNES has been, and will continue to be, damaged in an
amount as yet to be determined, though such amount exceeds $75,000.
166. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
COUNT II FIRST HURDLE PHOTOGRAPH VIOLATION OF 17 U.S.C. §1202
167. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
168. Under 17 U.S.C. §1202(c) the term “‘copyright management information’ means any of the
following information conveyed in connection with copies or phonorecords of a work” and includes
“(2) [t]he name of, and other identifying information about, the author of a work.”
169. Accordingly, the aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark on the First Hurdle Photograph, as
shown in EXHIBIT 14, constitutes copyright management information under 17 U.S.C. § 1202(c)
because it includes identifying information about the author of the work.
170. Upon information and belief, JACKSON has intentionally removed such copyright
management information without authority.
171. This information and belief is based at least on the printed version of JACKSON’s
INSTAGRAM PAGE shown in EXHIBIT 27 that shows the First Hurdle Photograph without the
aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark.
27 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 28 of 52
172. Upon information and belief, JACKSON has displayed the copyrighted work knowing that
the associated copyright management information had been removed without authority.
173. In removing copyright management information and displaying such work, JACKSON knew
or had reasonable grounds to know that it would induce, enable, facilitate, and/or conceal an
infringement of copyright.
174. Accordingly, JACKSON’s removal of copyright management information was willful,
intentional, and/or in bad faith.
175. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
COUNT III SECOND HURDLE PHOTOGRAPH COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
176. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
177. BARNES created and owns all copyrights in and to the Second Hurdle Photograph
identified in EXHIBIT 8.
178. BARNES’s copyright in and to the Second Hurdle Photograph in EXHIBIT 8 has been
registered with the United States Copyright Office. (See EXHIBIT 12.)
179. JACKSON and DUPONT have copied, published, distributed, sold, and/or otherwise used
or exploited the Second Hurdle Photograph identified in EXHIBIT 8 without permission or
authorization.
28 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 29 of 52
180. JACKSON and DUPONT infringed BARNES’s copyright by copying, publishing,
distributing, selling (or offering for sale) copies of, creating derivative works of, and/or otherwise
using BARNES’s copyrighted creative work without a license or permission as set forth more fully
above.
181. JACKSON’s and DUPONT’s unauthorized use of BARNES’s copyrighted work was willful,
intentional, and/or reckless.
182. As a result of JACKSON’s and DUPONT’s acts, BARNES has been and will continue to
be damaged in an amount as yet to be determined.
183. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
COUNT IV SECOND HURDLE PHOTOGRAPH VIOLATION OF 17 U.S.C. §1202
184. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
185. Under 17 U.S.C. §1202(c) the term “‘copyright management information’ means any of the
following information conveyed in connection with copies or phonorecords of a work” and includes
“(2) [t]he name of, and other identifying information about, the author of a work.”
186. Accordingly, the aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark on the Second Hurdle Photograph, as
shown in EXHIBIT 15, constitutes copyright management information under 17 U.S.C. §
1202(c)(2) because it includes identifying information about the author of the work.
29 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 30 of 52
187. On information and belief, JACKSON has intentionally removed such copyright
management information without the authority of the copyright owner or the law.
188. This information and belief is based at least on the printed version of the LEAP
TRADEMARK shown in EXHIBIT 22 that shows the Second Hurdle Photograph being licensed
and used as a trademark for APPAREL.
189. This information and belief is based at least on the printed version of APPAREL.COM
displayed in EXHIBITS 25 and 26 that shows the Second Hurdle Photograph being offered to sale
to customers.
190. In removing copyright management information and distributing such works and copies of
works, JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES knew or had reasonable grounds to know that it would
induce, enable, facilitate, and/or conceal an infringement of copyright.
191. Accordingly, JACKSON’s or ENTERPRISES’s removal of copyright management
information was willful, intentional, and/or in bad faith.
192. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
COUNT V SECOND HURDLE PHOTOGRAPH CONTRIBUTORY COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
193. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
194. JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES directed APPAREL to sell derivative works of
BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph.
30 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 31 of 52
195. BARNES has a reasonable belief that JACKSON and/or ENTERPTRISES provided or
sold copies of the derivative works of the Second Hurdle Photograph to various third parties,
including customers of APPAREL, based on the printed version of APPAREL.COM included as
EXHIBITS 25 and 26.
196. On information and belief, JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES also provided and/or sold
derivative works of the Second Hurdle Photograph to other commercial entities and/or distributors
throughout the United States.
197. Neither JACKSON nor ENTERPRISES was authorized to copy, distribute, license,
sublicense, transfer, or sell derivative works of BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph.
198. Neither JACKSON nor ENTERPRISES was authorized to direct APPAREL to create
derivative works of BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph, as APPAREL did when it offered to
sell derivative works of the Second Hurdle Photograph.
199. Neither JACKSON nor ENTERPRISES was authorized to copy, distribute, license,
sublicense, transfer, or sell the derivative works of the Second Hurdle Photograph created by
APPAREL.
200. At the time that it provided the derivative works to said commercial entities and/or
distributors, JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES knew or had reason to know that at least some of
these parties intended to sell and/or distribute the derivative works.
201. JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES intentionally induced, materially contributed to, and/or
otherwise facilitated the directly infringing acts carried out by APPAREL.
31 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 32 of 52
202. JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES, therefore, knowingly caused, enabled, and/or
materially contributed to the unauthorized and infringing use of BARNES’s Second Hurdle
Photograph through the creation of these derivative works.
203. The full nature and extent of JACKSON’s and/or ENTERPRISES’s contribution to the
creation of the derivative works of the Second Hurdle Photograph remains unknown.
204. The full nature and extent of JACKSON’s and/or ENTERPRISES’s use, sale, and
distribution of the derivative works of the Second Hurdle Photograph remains unknown.
205. JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES was aware, or should have been aware, that the use of
the Second Hurdle Photograph in connection with commercial products was unauthorized.
206. JACKSON’s and/or ENTERPRISES’s actions alleged herein were willful, knowing,
intentional, and/or reckless.
207. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
COUNT VI SECOND HURDLE PHOTOGRAPH CONTRIBUTORY COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
208. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
209. JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES directed DUPONT to sell derivative works of
BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph.
210. On information and belief, JACKSON and/or ENTERPTRISES provided a copy of the
Second Hurdle Photograph to DUPONT for the purpose of creating unauthorized derivative works
32 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 33 of 52
of the Second Hurdle Photograph and selling, publicly displaying, or transmitting such works to
JACKSON and to various third parties, including customers and potential customers of DUPONT,
as reflected in EXHIBIT 38.
211. Neither JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, nor DUPONT was authorized to copy, distribute,
license, sublicense, transfer, or sell derivative works of BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph.
212. Neither JACKSON nor ENTERPRISES was authorized to direct DUPONT to create
derivative works of BARNES’s Second Hurdle Photograph, as DUPONT did when it offered to
create and sell to JACKSON one or more derivative works of the Second Hurdle Photograph.
213. Neither JACKSON, ENTERPRISES, nor DUPONT was authorized to copy, distribute,
license, sublicense, transfer, or sell the derivative works of the Second Hurdle Photograph created
by DUPONT.
214. JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES intentionally induced, materially contributed to, and/or
otherwise facilitated the directly infringing acts carried out by DUPONT.
215. JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES, therefore, knowingly caused, enabled, and/or
materially contributed to the unauthorized and infringing use of BARNES’s Second Hurdle
Photograph through the creation of these derivative works.
216. The full nature and extent of JACKSON’s and/or ENTERPRISES’s contribution to the
creation of the derivative works of the Second Hurdle Photograph remains unknown.
217. The full nature and extent of JACKSON’s and/or ENTERPRISES’s use, sale, and
distribution of the derivative works of the Second Hurdle Photograph remains unknown.
33 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 34 of 52
218. JACKSON and/or ENTERPRISES was aware, or should have been aware, that the use of
the Second Hurdle Photograph in connection with commercial products was unauthorized.
219. JACKSON’s and/or ENTERPRISES’s actions alleged herein were willful, knowing,
intentional, and/or reckless.
220. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
COUNT VII RUNNING WITH THE FOOTBALL PHOTOGRAPH COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
221. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
222. BARNES created and owns the copyright in and to the Running With The Football
Photograph identified in EXHIBIT 9.
223. BARNES’s copyright in and to the Running With The Football Photograph in EXHIBIT 9
has been registered with the United States Copyright Office.
224. BARNES alleges, upon information and belief, that JACKSON has copied, published,
distributed, and/or otherwise used or exploited the Running With The Football Photograph
identified in EXHIBIT 9 without permission or authorization.
225. JACKSON infringed BARNES’s copyright by copying, publishing, distributing, and/or
otherwise using BARNES’s copyrighted creative work without a license or permission as set forth
more fully above.
34 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 35 of 52
226. JACKSON’s unauthorized use of BARNES’s copyrighted work was willful, intentional,
and/or reckless.
227. As a result of JACKSON’s acts, BARNES has been, and will continue to be, damaged in an
amount as yet to be determined.
228. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
COUNT VIII RUNNING WITH THE FOOTBALL PHOTOGRAPH VIOLATION OF 17 U.S.C. §1202
229. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
230. Under 17 U.S.C. §1202(c) the term “‘copyright management information’ means any of the
following information conveyed in connection with copies or phonorecords of a work” and includes
“(2) [t]he name of, and other identifying information about, the author of a work.”
231. Accordingly, the aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark on the Running With The Football
Photograph, as shown in EXHIBIT 16, constitutes copyright management information under 17
U.S.C. § 1202(c) because it includes identifying information about the author of the work.
232. Upon information and belief, JACKSON has intentionally removed such copyright
management information without authority.
233. This information and belief is based at least on the printed version of JACKSON’s
INSTAGRAM PAGE as shown in EXHIBIT 19 that shows the Running With The Football
Photograph without the aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark.
35 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 36 of 52
234. The aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark has been removed on said display of the Running
With The Football Photograph, as shown in EXHIBIT 19.
235. Upon information and belief, JACKSON has displayed the copyrighted work knowing that
the associated copyright management information had been removed without authority.
236. In removing copyright management information and displaying such work, JACKSON knew
or had reasonable grounds to know that it would induce, enable, facilitate, and/or conceal an
infringement of copyright.
237. Accordingly, JACKSON’s removal of copyright management information was willful,
intentional, and/or in bad faith.
238. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
COUNT IX CROSSING THE GOAL LINE PHOTOGRAPH COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
239. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
240. BARNES created and owns the copyright in and to the Crossing The Goal Line Photograph
identified in EXHIBIT 10.
241. BARNES’s copyright in and to the Crossing the Goal Line Photograph in EXHIBIT 10 has
been registered with the United States Copyright Office.
36 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 37 of 52
242. BARNES alleges, upon information and belief, that JACKSON has copied, published,
distributed, and/or otherwise used or exploited the Crossing the Goal Line Photograph identified in
EXHIBIT 10 without permission or authorization.
243. JACKSON infringed BARNES’s copyright by copying, publishing, distributing, and/or
otherwise using BARNES’s copyrighted creative work without a license or permission as set forth
more fully above.
244. JACKSON’s unauthorized use of BARNES’s copyrighted work was willful, intentional,
and/or reckless.
245. As a result of JACKSON’s acts, BARNES has been, and will continue to be, damaged in an
amount as yet to be determined.
246. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
COUNT X CROSSING THE GOAL LINE PHOTOGRAPH VIOLATION OF 17 U.S.C. §1202
247. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
248. Under 17 U.S.C. §1202(c) the term “‘copyright management information’ means any of the
following information conveyed in connection with copies or phonorecords of a work” and includes
“(2) [t]he name of, and other identifying information about, the author of a work.”
37 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 38 of 52
249. Accordingly, the aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark on the Crossing the Goal Line
Photograph, as shown in EXHIBIT 17, constitutes copyright management information under 17
U.S.C. § 1202(c) because it includes identifying information about the author of the work.
250. Upon information and belief, JACKSON has intentionally removed such copyright
management information without authority.
251. This information and belief is based at least on the printed version of JACKSON’s
INSTAGRAM PAGE shown in EXHIBIT 21 that shows the Crossing The Goal Line Photograph
without the aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark.
252. The aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark has been removed on said display of the Crossing
The Goal Line Photograph, as shown in EXHIBIT 21.
253. Upon information and belief, JACKSON has displayed the copyrighted work knowing that
the associated copyright management information had been removed without authority.
254. In removing copyright management information and displaying such work, JACKSON knew
or had reasonable grounds to know that it would induce, enable, facilitate, and/or conceal an
infringement of copyright.
255. Accordingly, JACKSON’s removal of copyright management information was willful,
intentional, and/or in bad faith.
256. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
38 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 39 of 52
COUNT XI TOUCHDOWN PHOTOGRAPH COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
257. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
258. BARNES created and owns the copyright in and to the Touchdown Photograph identified
in EXHIBIT 11.
259. BARNES’s copyright in and to the Touchdown Photograph in EXHIBIT 11 has been
registered with the United States Copyright Office.
260. Upon information and belief, JACKSON has copied, published, distributed, and/or
otherwise used or exploited the Touchdown Photograph identified in EXHIBIT 11 without
permission or authorization.
261. JACKSON infringed BARNES’s copyright by copying, publishing, distributing, and/or
otherwise using BARNES’s copyrighted creative works without a license or permission as set forth
more fully above.
262. JACKSON’s unauthorized use of BARNES’s copyrighted work was willful, intentional,
and/or reckless.
263. As a result of JACKSON’s acts, BARNES has been, and will continue to be, damaged in an
amount as yet to be determined.
264. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
39 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 40 of 52
COUNT XII TOUCHDOWN PHOTOGRAPH VIOLATION OF 17 U.S.C. §1202
265. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
266. Under 17 U.S.C. §1202(c) the term “‘copyright management information’ means any of the
following information conveyed in connection with copies or phonorecords of a work” and includes
“(2) [t]he name of, and other identifying information about, the author of a work.”
267. Accordingly, the aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark on the Touchdown Photograph, as
shown in EXHIBIT 18, constitutes copyright management information under 17 U.S.C. § 1202(c)
because it includes identifying information about the author of the work.
268. Upon information and belief, JACKSON has intentionally removed such copyright
management information without authority.
269. This information and belief is based at least on the printed version of JACKSON’s
INSTAGRAM PAGE shown in EXHIBIT 20 that shows the Touchdown Photograph without the
aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark.
270. The aforesaid BARNES’s Watermark has been removed on said display of the Touchdown
Photograph, as shown in EXHIBIT 20.
271. Upon information and belief, JACKSON has displayed the copyrighted work knowing that
the associated copyright management information had been removed without authority.
40 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 41 of 52
272. In removing copyright management information and displaying such work, JACKSON knew
or had reasonable grounds to know that it would induce, enable, facilitate, and/or conceal an
infringement of copyright.
273. Accordingly, JACKSON’s removal of copyright management information was willful,
intentional, and/or in bad faith.
274. BARNES seeks all damages recoverable under the Copyright Act.
COUNT XIII PATTERN OF RACKETEERING ACTIVITY UNDER THE FEDERAL RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS (RICO) ACT VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c)
275. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
276. 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1) defines “racketeering activity” as including any act which is indictable
under, inter alia, 18 U.S.C. § 2319 (relating to criminal infringement of a copyright). 18 U.S.C. §
2319 defines the punishments for violations of 17 U.S.C. § 506(a).
277. 17 U.S.C. § 506(a)(1)(a) defines criminal copyright infringement as the willful infringement
of a copyright if the infringement was committed for purposes of commercial advantage or private
financial gain.
278. BARNES has valid copyrights in the First Hurdle Photograph, the Second Hurdle
Photograph, the Running With The Football Photograph, the Crossing The Goal Line Photograph,
and the Touchdown Photograph.
41 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 42 of 52
279. JACKSON infringed BARNES’s copyrights willfully and with actual knowledge of the illegal
activities, as evidenced at least by JACKSON’s removal of BARNES’s Watermark from the Second
Hurdle Photograph, the Running With The Football Photograph, the Crossing The Goal Line
Photograph, and the Touchdown Photograph, as well as the fact that JACKSON used the Second
Hurdle Photograph to direct STACKS in creating the STACKS JEWELRY.
280. JACKSON knew his actions were in violation of the Copyright Act.
281. JACKSON’s infringements of BARNES’s copyrights served the purpose of promoting the
ERA 8 APPAREL sold through ENTERPRISES, as evidenced at least by the fact that JACKSON’s
Twitter account and Instagram account include the term “era8” in the account names.
282. The promotion of apparel sold through ENTERPRISES provided JACKSON with
commercial advantage and financial gain.
283. Each instance of JACKSON’s infringement of BARNES’s copyrights constituted willful
infringement of a copyright for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, and
therefore constituted criminal copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 506(a)(1)(a), indictable
under 18 U.S.C. § 2319.
284. JACKSON conducted the instances of criminal copyright infringement through a pattern, in
that they were related and continuous by involving the same victim, namely, BARNES.
285. JACKSON conducted the instances of criminal copyright infringement through a pattern, in
that at least two of the instances of JACKSON’s infringement of BARNES’S copyrights had the same
or similar methods of commission, in that JACKSON posted infringing content on JACKSON’s
social media accounts.
42 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 43 of 52
286. The last of the alleged acts of racketeering activity by JACKSON occurred within ten years
after commission of a prior act of racketeering activity. Specifically, the creation of the STACKS
JEWELRY occurred on August 28, 2018, which was within ten years after commission of a prior act
of racketeering activity, namely, the posting of an unauthorized derivative work on JACKSON’s
INSTAGRAM PAGE displaying and using the Second Hurdle Photograph and the Running With
the Football Photograph, which occurred on September 10, 2016.
287. Because JACKSON owns a trademark registration for the infringing LEAP TRADEMARK,
there is a real threat of repeated racketeering activity by JACKSON that exists. The LEAP
TRADEMARK registration acts as prima facie evidence of JACKSON’s ownership of a mark the
use of which constitutes infringement of BARNES’s copyright in the Second Hurdle Photograph.
288. JACKSON’s pattern of racketeering activity is an open-ended scheme that poses a threat of
continuity at least because of JACKSON’s ownership of the LEAP TRADEMARK registration, and
also because JACKSON’s infringing social media posts are part of JACKONS’s regular way of
conducting business.
289. In the alternative, JACKSON’s pattern of racketeering activity is a closed-ended scheme that
involved related predicate acts of racketeering activity that extended over a substantial period of time.
JACKSON’s series of related instances of criminal copyright infringement extended over a period
of at least about two years, from the infringing social media post by JACKSON on September 10,
2016, to the infringing derivative work of jewelry made by DUPONT under the direction of
JACKSON on August 28, 2018. During such time, there were numerous instances of criminal
copyright infringement committed by JACKSON involving BARNES’s copyrights.
43 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 44 of 52
290. ENTERPRISES is engaged in interstate commerce, at least by selling apparel across state
lines. ENTERPRISES is directly engaged in the distribution of goods in interstate commerce.
291. JACKSON is employed by, or associated with, ENTERPRISES, at least because JACKSON
is the President of ENTERPRISES.
292. JACKSON participates in the conduct of the affairs of ENTERPRISES, at least because
JACKSON, as the President of ENTERPRISES, exercises a managerial role in ENTERPRISES’s
affairs.
293. ENTERPRISES is an enterprise as defined under 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4).
294. JACKSON is a culpable person under 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) and a person distinct from
ENTERPRISES.
295. In the alternative, the association in fact between ENTERPRISES and JACKSON is an
enterprise as defined under 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4). Though JACKSON serves as President of
ENTERPRISES, JACKSON individually owns the LEAP TRADEMARK registration and
therefore has co-mingled the business of ENTERPRISES and JACKSON’s personal interests.
296. In promoting the ERA 8 APPAREL business and brand, JACKSON was conducting both
ENTERPRISES’s affairs and JACKSON’s affairs, not merely JACKSON’s own affairs, at least
because ENTERPRISES owns or operates ERA 8 APPAREL while JACKSON individually owns
the LEAP TRADEMARK registration.
297. The association in fact between ENTERPRISES and JACKSON is engaged in interstate
commerce, at least by selling ERA 8 APPAREL across state lines.
44 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 45 of 52
298. Each of JACKSON and ENTERPRISES is free to act independently and advance his or its
own interests contrary to those of the other member of the enterprise.
299. JACKSON is a person distinct from the association in fact between ENTERPRISES and
JACKSON.
300. JACKSON has conducted or participated in the conduct of ENTERPRISES’s affairs
through a pattern of racketeering activity by promoting the ERA 8 APPAREL through multiple
instances of criminal copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 506(a)(1)(a), indictable under 18
U.S.C. § 2319, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c).
301. JACKSON has conducted or participated in the conduct of the affairs of the association in
fact between ENTERPRISES and JACKSON through a pattern of racketeering activity by
promoting the ERA 8 APPAREL business and brand through multiple instances of criminal
copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 506(a)(1)(a), indictable under 18 U.S.C. § 2319, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c).
302. JACKSON’s pattern of racketeering activity affected ENTERPRISES, in that JACKSON
promoted ENTERPRISES through JACKSON’s social media posts and served as President of
ENTERPRISES while engaging in the pattern of racketeering activity.
303. JACKSON’s pattern of racketeering activity affected the association in fact between
ENTERPRISES and JACKSON in that JACKSON promoted ENTERPRISES through
JACKSON’s social media posts, served as President of ENTERPRISES, and promoted the LEAP
TRADEMARK owned by JACKSON individually but used in connection with ERA 8 APPAREL,
while engaging in the pattern of racketeering activity.
45 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 46 of 52
304. BARNES is a person who has sustained injury to his business or property by reason of
JACKSON’s violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) in that BARNES is a professional photographer and
JACKSON’s violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) involved multiple instances of infringing BARNES’s
copyrights.
305. The infringements of BARNES’s copyrights by JACKSON deprived BARNES of his ability
to generate income from his business property, namely, his copyrighted photographs. JACKSON’s
pattern of racketeering activity is the factual and proximate cause of this injury to BARNES’s
business. But for JACKSON’s pattern of racketeering activity, BARNES would not have suffered
this injury.
306. JACKSON’s unlawful distribution of and creation of derivative works of BARNES’s
photographs caused BARNES’s photographs to be publicly transmitted and distributed without
compensation to BARNES. JACKSON’s pattern of racketeering activity is the factual and proximate
cause of this injury to BARNES’s business. But for JACKSON’s pattern of racketeering activity,
BARNES would not have suffered this injury.
307. The injury to BARNES’s business or property was foreseeable to JACKSON at the time of
JACKSON’s unlawful conduct, and there were no intervening causes to the injury to BARNES’s
business or property.
308. Accordingly, JACKSON’s violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) has directly and proximately
caused injury to BARNES in his business or property.
46 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 47 of 52
309. This lawsuit is being filed, and this claim is being brought, within four years of BARNES’s
discovery of the injury to BARNES’s business or property caused by JACKSON’s pattern of
racketeering activity.
310. Since becoming aware of the injury to BARNES’s business or property, BARNES has
exercised reasonable diligence to discover the pattern of racketeering activity by JACKSON.
311. BARNES seeks all remedies under 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c).
COUNT XIV RICO CONSPIRACY VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d)
312. BARNES repeats and re-alleges each of the above allegations contained in paragraphs 1
through 158 as if set forth fully herein.
313. DUPONT participated in the creation of the STACKS JEWELRY in concert with, or under
the direction of, JACKSON.
314. DUPONT and JACKSON knew that the creation of the STACKS JEWELRY was in
violation of the Copyright Act in that DUPONT or someone acting under his direction used the
Second Hurdle Photograph while creating the STACKS JEWELRY, as evidenced by a video posted
on the Stacks Custom Jewelry Facebook page on September 4, 2018.
315. The creation of the STACKS JEWELRY served the purpose of commercial advantage or
private financial gain for both JACKSON and DUPONT in that the STACKS JEWELRY promotes
the LEAP TRADEMARK, owned by JACKSON, and the ERA 8 APPAREL brand and business,
owned by ENTERPRISES, and that DUPONT was paid by JACKSON to create the STACKS
JEWELRY.
47 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 48 of 52
316. The creation of the STACKS JEWELRY constituted criminal copyright infringement under
17 U.S.C. § 506(a)(1)(a), indictable under 18 U.S.C. § 2319.
317. The creation of the STACKS JEWELRY constituted an act of racketeering activity under
18 U.S.C. § 1961(1).
318. DUPONT participated in the creation of the photographs of the STACKS JEWELRY in
concert with, or under the direction of, JACKSON.
319. The creation of the photographs of the STACKS JEWELRY served the purpose of
commercial advantage or private financial gain for both JACKSON and DUPONT in that the
photographs of the STACKS JEWELRY promote the ERA 8 APPAREL brand and business owned
by ENTERPRISES, promote the LEAP TRADEMARK owned by JACKSON, and promote
DUPONT’s jewelry business.
320. The creation and dissemination of the photographs of the STACKS JEWELRY constituted
criminal copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 506(a)(1)(a), indictable under 18 U.S.C. § 2319.
321. The creation and dissemination of the photographs of the STACKS JEWELRY constituted
an act of racketeering activity under 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1).
322. The copyright infringement involving the creation of the STACKS JEWELRY and the
copyright infringement involving the creation and dissemination of the photographs of the STACKS
JEWELRY constitute a pattern in that they were related and continuous by involving the same victim,
namely, BARNES.
323. ENTERPRISES is an enterprise as defined under 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4).
48 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 49 of 52
324. JACKSON is a culpable person under 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), and is a person distinct from
ENTERPRISES.
325. In the alternative, the association in fact between JACKSON and ENTERPRISES
constitutes an enterprise as defined under 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4).
326. JACKSON is a culpable person under 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) and a person distinct from the
association in fact between JACKSON and ENTERPRISES.
327. DUPONT agreed with JACKSON to participate in two acts of racketeering activity that
furthered the business interests of ENTERPRISES, and facilitated the operation of
ENTERPRISES, by promoting the ERA 8 APPAREL business and brand. In so doing, DUPONT
conspired with JACKSON to participate, directly or indirectly, in the affairs of ENTERPRISES
through a pattern of racketeering activity.
328. Alternatively, by agreeing to participate in at least two acts of racketeering activity that
promoted the LEAP TRADEMARK and the ERA 8 APPAREL brand and business, DUPONT
conspired with JACKSON to participate, directly or indirectly, in the affairs of the association in fact
between ENTERPRISES and JACKSON through a pattern of racketeering activity.
329. JACKSON and DUPONT agreed to participate in an endeavor the completion of which
constituted a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c). Accordingly, DUPONT and JACKSON unlawfully
conspired to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d).
330. BARNES was injured in his business or property by reason of the conspiracy between
JACKSON and DUPONT to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c).
49 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 50 of 52
331. BARNES was injured in his business or property by the commission of an overt act in
furtherance of the conspiracy between JACKSON and DUPONT to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c).
Specifically, the creation and distribution of derivative works of BARNES’s photographs by
DUPONT in agreement with JACKSON caused BARNES’s photographs to be publicly transmitted
and distributed without compensation to BARNES.
332. DUPONT’s and JACKSON’s acts in furtherance of the conspiracy were the actual and
proximate cause of BARNES’ injury to his business or property.
333. This lawsuit is being filed, and this claim is being brought, within four years of BARNES’s
discovery of the injury to BARNES’s business or property caused by the conspiracy between
JACKSON and DUPONT to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c).
334. Since becoming aware of the injury to BARNES’s business or property caused by the
conspiracy between JACKSON and DUPONT to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), BARNES has
exercised reasonable diligence to discover the conspiracy between DUPONT and JACKSON to
violate 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c).
335. BARNES seeks all remedies under 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c)
WHEREFORE, BARNES respectfully prays for judgment on his behalf and for the
following relief:
1. A jury trial on all issues so triable;
2. All allowable damages under the Copyright Act, including, but not limited to, statutory
damages, damages for willfulness, damages for removal of copyright management information in
violation of 17 U.S.C. §1202, and attorneys’ fees pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §505;
50 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 51 of 52
3. Trebled damages, the costs of the suit, and attorneys’ fees pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c);
4. BARNES’s full costs, including litigation expenses, expert witness fees, interest, and any
other amounts authorized under law;
5. Any other relief authorized by law, including punitive and/or exemplary damages; and
6. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Dated: April 15, 2021
Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ Jon A. Jacobson, Esq.
Local Counsel:
Jon A. Jacobson, Esq., FBN 155748 JACOBSON LAW P.A. 224 Datura St., Suite 812 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: (561) 880-8900 Facsimile: (561) 880-8910 Email 1: [email protected] Email 2: [email protected] Email 3: [email protected]
Lead Counsel (pro hac vice admission pending):
James E. Griffith MACMILLAN, SOBANSKI & TODD, LLC Illinois Bar #: 6269854 T: (419) 255-5900 F: (419) 255-9639 E: [email protected]
Joseph W. Tucker MACMILLAN, SOBANSKI & TODD, LLC 720 Water Street, Fifth Floor Toledo, OH 43604 Ohio Bar #: 0087951 T: (419) 255-5900
51 Case 9:21-cv-80722-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2021 Page 52 of 52
F: (419) 255-9639 E: [email protected]
James M. Buchanan MACMILLAN, SOBANSKI & TODD, LLC 720 Water Street, Fifth Floor Toledo, OH 43604 Michigan Bar #: P61938 T: (419) 255-5900 F: (419) 255-9639 E: [email protected]
Timothy J. Van Tuinen MACMILLAN, SOBANSKI & TODD, LLC 720 Water Street, Fifth Floor Attorneys for Plaintiff Toledo, OH 43604 Ohio Bar #: 0081841 T: (419) 255-5900 F: (419) 255-9639 E: [email protected]
52