COMPLAINT 16 WILL ADAMS, P/K/A Will.I.Am, 17 Individually and D/B/A WILL.I.AM Complaint Filed: December 10, 2010 MUSIC PUBLISHING, an Individual; 18 Et Al

George Clinton v. Will Adams et al Doc. 31

1 CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR, PC LINDA M. BURROW, State Bar No. 194668 2 [email protected] HEATHER PEARSON, State Bar No. 235167 3 [email protected] 1000 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 600 4 Los Angeles, California 90017-2463 Telephone: (213) 629-9040 5 Facsimile: (213) 629-9022 6 Attorneys for Defendants UMG RECORDINGS, INC. 7 (a named defendant and erroneously sued as UNIVERSAL 8 MUSIC GROUP, INC.) 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 WESTERN DIVISION 12 13 GEORGE CLINTON, an individual, Case No. CV 10-9476 ODW (PLAx) 14 Plaintiff, 15 UMG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER TO v. COMPLAINT 16 WILL ADAMS, p/k/a will.i.am, 17 individually and d/b/a WILL.I.AM Complaint Filed: December 10, 2010 MUSIC PUBLISHING, an individual; 18 et al. Trial Date: None Set 19 Defendants. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Dockets.Justia.com 1 Pursuant to Rule 8(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants 2 UMG Recordings, Inc., on its own behalf and erroneously sued as Universal Music 3 Group, Inc. (collectively, the “UMG Defendants”) hereby answer the Complaint of 4 Plaintiff George Clinton (“Plaintiff”). If an averment is not specifically admitted, it 5 is hereby denied. 6 INTRODUCTION 7 1. Answering paragraph 1, the UMG Defendants admit that the Complaint 8 seeks the stated relief, but deny any liability to Plaintiff whatsoever. The UMG 9 Defendants further admit that the song entitled “Shut Up,” performed by the Black 10 Eyed Peas, was first released in 2003 and that remixes of “Shut Up” were released 11 in 2003 and 2009. Except as expressly admitted herein, the UMG Defendants deny 12 each and every allegation contained in paragraph 1. 13 2. Answering paragraph 2, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 14 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 15 deny each and every such allegation. 16 3. Answering paragraph 3, the UMG Defendants admit that Plaintiff seeks 17 the stated relief, but deny any liability to Plaintiff. Except as expressly admitted 18 herein, the UMG Defendants deny each and every allegation contained in paragraph 19 3. 20 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 21 4. Answering paragraph 4, the UMG Defendants admit that Plaintiff 22 purports to bring this action pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 101, et seq. and that this Court 23 has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338, but deny 24 any liability to Plaintiff whatsoever. 25 5. Answering paragraph 5, the UMG Defendants admit that they are 26 subject to venue in this District. The UMG Defendants lack sufficient information 27 to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 5, and on that 28 basis deny each and every such allegation. CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -1- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 6. Answering paragraph 6, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 2 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 3 deny each and every such allegation. 4 7. Answering paragraph 7, the UMG Defendants admit that they are 5 subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court because their principal places of 6 business are in this District. Except as expressly admitted herein, the UMG 7 Defendants deny each and every allegation contained in paragraph 7. 8 8. Answering paragraph 8, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 9 information to admit or deny the allegations contained, and on that basis deny each 10 and every such allegation. 11 PARTIES 12 9. Answering paragraph 9, the UMG Defendants admit that George 13 Clinton is a recording artist and composer. The UMG Defendants lack sufficient 14 information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 9, 15 and on that basis deny each and every such allegation. 16 10. Answering paragraph 10, the UMG Defendants admit that Defendant 17 William Adams, professionally known as will.i.am, is a member of the musical 18 group The Black Eyed Peas, and has been credited as a producer and songwriter for 19 various songs released by that group. The UMG Defendants lack sufficient 20 information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 10, 21 and on that basis deny each and every such allegation. 22 11. Answering paragraph 11, the UMG Defendants admit that Defendant 23 Allan Pineda, professionally known as apl.de.ap, is a member of the musical group 24 The Black Eyed Peas, and has been credited as a songwriter for various songs 25 released by that group. The UMG Defendants lack sufficient information to admit 26 or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 11, and on that basis deny 27 each and every such allegation. 28 CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -2- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 12. Answering paragraph 12, the UMG Defendants admit that Defendant 2 Jaime Gomez, professionally known as Taboo, is a member of the musical group 3 The Black Eyed Peas, and has been credited as a songwriter for various songs 4 released by that group. The UMG Defendants lack sufficient information to admit 5 or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 12, and on that basis deny 6 each and every such allegation. 7 13. Answering paragraph 13, the UMG Defendants admit that Defendant 8 Stacy Ferguson, professionally known as Fergie, is a member of the musical group 9 The Black Eyed Peas, and has been credited as a songwriter for various songs 10 released by that group. The UMG Defendants lack sufficient information to admit 11 or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 13, and on that basis deny 12 each and every such allegation. 13 14. Answering paragraph 14, the UMG Defendants admit that Defendant 14 George Pajon, Jr. is credited as a songwriter on various songs released by the Black 15 Eyed Peas. The UMG Defendants lack sufficient information to admit or deny the 16 remaining allegations contained in paragraph 14, and on that basis deny each and 17 every such allegation. 18 15. Answering paragraph 15, the UMG Defendants admit that Defendant 19 John Curtis is credited as a songwriter on various songs released by the Black Eyed 20 Peas. The UMG Defendants are without sufficient information to admit or deny the 21 remaining allegations contained in paragraph 15, and on that basis deny each and 22 every such allegation. 23 16. Answering paragraph 16, the UMG Defendants admit that UMG 24 Recordings, Inc. is in the business of releasing sound recordings, including “Shut 25 the Phunk Up” and remixes of “Shut Up” through various record labels. Except as 26 expressly admitted herein, the UMG Defendants deny the allegations contained in 27 paragraph 16 as they pertain to the UMG Defendants. The UMG Defendants are 28 CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -3- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 without sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained 2 in paragraph 16, and on that basis deny each and every such allegation. 3 17. Answering paragraph 17, the UMG Defendants admit the allegations 4 contained therein. 5 18. Answering paragraph 18, the UMG Defendants admit the allegations 6 contained therein. 7 19. Answering paragraph 19, the UMG Defendants admit that UMG 8 Recordings, Inc. is in the business of releasing sound recordings through various 9 record labels and that those labels include Interscope Records, A & M Records, 10 Island Records and Def Jam Records. The UMG Defendants further admit that 11 labels under the UMG Recordings, Inc. umbrella released “Shut the Phunk Up” and 12 remixes of “Shut Up.” Except as expressly admitted herein, the UMG Defendants 13 deny each and every allegation contained in paragraph 19. 14 20. Answering paragraph 20, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 15 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 16 deny each and every such allegation. 17 21. Answering paragraph 21, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 18 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 19 deny each and every such allegation. 20 22. Answering paragraph 22, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 21 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 22 deny each and every such allegation. 23 23. Answering paragraph 23, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 24 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 25 deny each and every such allegation. 26 24. Answering paragraph 24, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 27 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 28 deny each and every such allegation. CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -4- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 25. Answering paragraph 25, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 2 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 3 deny each and every such allegation. 4 26. Answering paragraph 26, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 5 allegation contained in this paragraph as it pertains to the UMG Defendants. The 6 UMG Defendants lack sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining 7 allegations contained in paragraph 26, and on that basis deny each and every such 8 allegation. 9 27. Answering paragraph 27, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 10 allegation contained in this paragraph as it pertains to the UMG Defendants. The 11 UMG Defendants lack sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining 12 allegations contained in paragraph 27, and on that basis deny each and every such 13 allegation. 14 SAMPLING “(NOT JUST) KNEE DEEP” 15 28. Answering paragraph 28, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 16 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 17 deny each and every such allegation. 18 29. Answering paragraph 29, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 19 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 20 deny each and every such allegation. 21 30. Answering paragraph 30, the UMG Defendants admit that UMG 22 Recordings, Inc. labels have released “Shut the Phunk Up” and remixes of “Shut 23 Up.” The UMG Defendants lack sufficient information to admit or deny the 24 remaining allegations contained in paragraph 30, and on that basis deny each and 25 every such allegation. 26 31. Answering paragraph 31, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 27 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 28 deny each and every such allegation. CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -5- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 32. Answering paragraph 32, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 2 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 3 deny each and every such allegation. 4 33. Answering paragraph 33, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 5 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 6 deny each and every such allegation. 7 34. Answering paragraph 34, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 8 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 9 deny each and every such allegation. 10 35. Answering paragraph 35, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 11 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 12 deny each and every such allegation. 13 36. Answering paragraph 36, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 14 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 15 deny each and every such allegation. 16 37. Answering paragraph 37, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 17 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 18 deny each and every such allegation. 19 38. Answering paragraph 38, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 20 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 21 deny each and every such allegation. 22 RELEASE OF SHUT UP REMIX 23 39. Answering paragraph 39, the UMG Defendants admit that the Black 24 Eyed Peas album Elephunk was released in 2003 and that Defendants Adams, 25 Gomez, Pineda, and Ferguson were in 2003 and are currently members of the Black 26 Eyed Peas. The UMG defendants lack sufficient information to admit or deny the 27 remaining allegations contained in paragraph 39, and on that basis deny each and 28 every such allegation. CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -6- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 40. Answering paragraph 40, the UMG Defendants admit that Elephunk 2 was released on the A&M Records label. Except as expressly admitted herein, the 3 UMG Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 40. 4 41. Answering paragraph 41, the UMG Defendants admit the allegations 5 contained therein. 6 42. Answering paragraph 42, the UMG Defendants admit that a sound 7 recording entitled “Shut Up” appears on the Elephunk album. The UMG 8 Defendants lack sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations 9 contained in paragraph 42, and on that basis deny each and every such allegation. 10 43. Answering paragraph 43, the UMG Defendants deny that “Shut Up” 11 was not released as a single in the United States. The UMG Defendants lack 12 sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in 13 paragraph 43, and on that basis deny each and every such allegation. 14 44. Answering paragraph 44, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 15 information to admit or deny the allegation contained in paragraph 44, and on that 16 basis deny each and every such allegation. 17 45. Answering paragraph 45, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 18 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 19 deny each and every such allegation. 20 46. Answering paragraph 46, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 21 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 22 deny each and every such allegation. 23 47. Answering paragraph 47, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 24 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 25 deny each and every such allegation. 26 48. Answering paragraph 48, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 27 allegation contained therein. 28 CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -7- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 RELEASE OF “SHUT THE PHUNK UP REMIX” 2 49. Answering paragraph 49, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 3 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 4 deny each and every such allegation. 5 50. Answering paragraph 50, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 6 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 7 deny each and every such allegation. 8 51. Answering paragraph 51, the UMG Defendants admit that The E.N.D. 9 was released in or about June 2009 and that certain deluxe editions of The E.N.D. 10 contain a sound recording entitled “Shut the Phunk Up.” The UMG Defendants lack 11 sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in 12 paragraph 51, and on that basis deny each and every such allegation. 13 52. Answering paragraph 52, the UMG Defendants admit that The E.N.D. 14 was nominated for a 2010 Grammy Award for “Album of the Year” and won the 15 2010 Grammy for “Best Pop Vocal Album” and further admit that the 2010 16 Grammy Awards were held on or about January 31, 2010. The UMG Defendants 17 admit that The E.N.D. was released on the Interscope Records label, but deny that 18 The E.N.D. was also released on the Island Def Jam label. The UMG Defendants 19 lack sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in 20 paragraph 52, and on that basis deny each and every such allegation. 21 53. Answering paragraph 53, the UMG Defendants admit that a sound 22 recording entitled “Shut the Phunk Up” is available for download from iTunes for 23 $1.29. The UMG Defendants lack sufficient information to admit or deny the 24 remaining allegations contained in paragraph 53, and on that basis deny each and 25 every such allegation. 26 54. Answering paragraph 54, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 27 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 28 deny each and every such allegation. CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -8- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 55. Answering paragraph 55, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 2 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 3 deny each and every such allegation. 4 56. Answering paragraph 56, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 5 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 6 deny each and every such allegation. 7 57. Answering paragraph 57, the UMG Defendants admit that Virgil 8 Roberts sent a letter dated July 17, 2009 to Craig Marshall at Interscope attaching a 9 judgment entered June 20, 2005. The UMG Defendants lack sufficient information 10 to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 57, and on that 11 basis deny each and every such allegation. 12 58. Answering paragraph 58, the UMG Defendants admit the allegations 13 contained therein. 14 59. Answering paragraph 59, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 15 information to admit or deny the allegation contained therein, and on that basis deny 16 each and every such allegation. 17 60. Answering paragraph 60, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 18 information to admit or deny the allegation contained therein, and on that basis deny 19 each and every such allegation. 20 61. Answering paragraph 61, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 21 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 22 deny each and every such allegation. 23 62. Answering paragraph 62, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 24 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 25 deny each and every such allegation. 26 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SAMPLING 27 63. Answering paragraph 63, the UMG Defendants state that this paragraph 28 consists of legal assertions to which no response is required. To the extent any CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -9- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 further response is required, the UMG Defendants deny the allegations contained in 2 paragraph 63. 3 64. Answering paragraph 64, the UMG Defendants state that this paragraph 4 consists of legal assertions to which no response is required. To the extent any 5 further response is required, the UMG Defendants deny the allegations contained in 6 paragraph 64. 7 LIABILITY OF EACH DEFENDANT AND DAMAGES TO 8 PLAINTIFF 9 65. Answering paragraph 65, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 10 allegation contained therein. 11 66. Answering paragraph 66, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 12 allegation contained therein. 13 67. Answering paragraph 67, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 14 allegation contained therein. 15 68. Answering paragraph 68, the UMG Defendants lack sufficient 16 information to admit or deny the allegations contained therein, and on that basis 17 deny each and every such allegation. 18 69. Answering paragraph 69, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 19 allegation contained therein. 20 70. Answering paragraph 70, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 21 allegation contained therein. 22 71. Answering paragraph 71, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 23 allegation contained therein. 24 72. Answering paragraph 72, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 25 allegation contained therein. 26 27 28 CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -10- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2 (Copyright Infringement (sound recording) relating to “(Not Just) Knee Deep”; against all named defendants and DOES 1 through 10) 3 73. Answering paragraph 73, the UMG Defendants incorporate their 4 answers and responses to paragraphs 1-72 above as if fully restated herein. 5 74. Answering paragraph 74, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 6 allegation contained therein. 7 75. Answering paragraph 75, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 8 allegation contained therein. 9 76. Answering paragraph 76, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 10 allegation contained therein. 11 77. Answering paragraph 77, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 12 allegation contained therein. 13 78. Answering paragraph 78, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 14 allegation contained therein. 15 79. Answering paragraph 79, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 16 allegation contained therein. 17 80. Answering paragraph 80, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 18 allegation contained therein. 19 81. Answering paragraph 81, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 20 allegation contained therein. 21 82. Answering paragraph 82, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 22 allegation contained therein. 23 83. Answering paragraph 83, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 24 allegation contained therein. 25 26 27 28 CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -11- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2 (Declaratory Judgment; 3 against all named defendants and DOES 1 through 10) 4 84. Answering paragraph 84, the UMG Defendants incorporate their 5 answers and responses to paragraphs 1-83 above as if fully restated herein. 6 85. Answering paragraph 85, the UMG Defendants state that this paragraph 7 consists of legal assertions to which no response is required. To the extent any 8 further response is required, the UMG Defendants deny the allegations contained in 9 paragraph 85. 10 86. Answering paragraph 86, the UMG Defendants admit that the 11 Complaint purports to seek declaratory relief, but deny that the Plaintiff is entitled to 12 any such relief. Except as expressly admitted herein, the UMG Defendants deny 13 each and every allegation contained in paragraph 86. 14 87. Answering paragraph 87, the UMG Defendants admit that the 15 Complaint purports to seek declaratory relief, but deny that the Plaintiff is entitled to 16 any such relief. Except as expressly admitted herein, the UMG Defendants deny 17 each and every allegation contained in paragraph 87. 18 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF 19 (Permanent injunction; 20 against all named defendants and DOES 1 through 10) 21 88. Answering paragraph 88, the UMG Defendants incorporate their 22 answers and responses to paragraphs 1-87 above as if fully restated herein. 23 89. Answering paragraph 89, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 24 allegation contained therein. 25 90. Answering paragraph 90, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 26 allegation contained therein. 27 91. Answering paragraph 91, the UMG Defendants deny each and every 28 allegation contained therein. CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -12- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 NATURE OF LIABILITY 2 94. Answering paragraph 94,1 the UMG Defendants deny each and every 3 allegation contained therein. 4 ANSWER TO PRAYER FOR RELIEF 5 Answering paragraphs (a) through (k) of the prayer for relief, the UMG 6 Defendants deny that Plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought in these paragraphs, and 7 deny that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief whatsoever. 8 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 9 The UMG Defendants plead the following separate and distinct affirmative 10 defenses without conceding that they bear the burden of proof as to any of these 11 issues. The UMG Defendants reserve the right to assert additional affirmative 12 defenses that discovery indicates are proper. 13 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 (Failure to State a Claim) 15 1. Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, fails to 16 state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 17 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 18 (License) 19 2. Plaintiff’s claims and the relief requested are barred based on the 20 existence of a valid license that authorized each of Defendants to engage in the 21 allegedly infringing conduct. 22 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 (Innocent Infringement) 24 3. As to each and all claims for relief based upon the UMG Defendants’ 25 alleged infringement of alleged copyrights owned by Plaintiff, Plaintiff is barred 26

27 1 The Complaint does not include a paragraph 92 or 93. 28 CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -13- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 from recovering damages arising from such alleged infringement, or such damages 2 should be reduced, because any infringement by the UMG Defendants was innocent 3 and without notice or knowledge of Plaintiff’s purported rights. 4 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 5 (Statute of Limitations) 6 4. Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, is 7 barred in whole or in part by such statutes of limitation as may be applicable. 8 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 (Laches) 10 5. Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, is 11 barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of laches. 12 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 13 (Consent) 14 6. Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, fails 15 because Plaintiff, and/or the persons and/or entities acting on his behalf, consented 16 to and acquiesced in the subject conduct. 17 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 18 (Waiver) 19 7. Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, is 20 barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of waiver. 21 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 22 (Estoppel) 23 8. Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, is 24 barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of estoppel. 25 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 26 (Unclean Hands) 27 9. Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, is 28 barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of unclean hands. CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -14- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (Good Faith) 3 10. Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, fails 4 because Defendants’ actions with respect to Plaintiff were consistent with 5 Defendants’ obligations, if any, and were justified and effected in good faith. 6 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 7 (Justification and Privilege) 8 11. Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, is 9 barred by the doctrine of justification and privilege, in that all actions by the UMG 10 Defendants were lawful and were fair and reasonable under the circumstances. 11 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 12 (Indemnity) 13 12. To the extent that Plaintiff is entitled to recover from the UMG 14 Defendants, the UMG Defendants are entitled to equitable and contractual 15 indemnity from other persons and parties causing or contributing to such damages. 16 THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 17 (Apportionment of Fault) 18 13. Plaintiff’s damages, if any, were caused by the negligence and/or acts 19 or omissions of parties other than the UMG Defendants, whether or not parties to 20 this action. By reason thereof, Plaintiff’s damages, if any, as against the UMG 21 Defendants, must be reduced by the proportion of fault attributable to such other 22 parties, and to the extent that this is necessary, the UMG Defendants may be entitled 23 to partial indemnity from others on a comparative fault basis. 24 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 25 (Intervening and Superseding Cause) 26 14. Assuming Plaintiff suffered or sustained any loss, damage or injury, 27 which Defendants specifically deny, such loss, damage or injury was proximately 28 caused or contributed to by the negligence or wrongful conduct of other parties, CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -15- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 persons or entities, including Plaintiff, and that their negligence or wrongful conduct 2 was an intervening and superseding cause of the purported loss, damage or injury of 3 which Plaintiff complains. 4 FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 5 (Failure to Mitigate) 6 15. Assuming that any loss, injury or damage occurred as Plaintiff alleges, 7 which the UMG Defendants specifically deny. Plaintiff has failed to mitigate those 8 damages. 9 10 WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for relief as follows: 11 1. That the Complaint be dismissed, with prejudice and in its entirety; 12 2. That Plaintiff take nothing by reason of this Complaint and that 13 judgment be entered against Plaintiff and in favor of Defendants; 14 3. That Defendants be awarded attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in 15 defending this action; and 16 4. That Defendants be granted such other and further relief as the Court 17 may deem just and proper. 18 19 DATED: March 10, 2011 Respectfully submitted, 20 CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR, PC 21 LINDA M. BURROW HEATHER PEARSON 22 23 24 By /s/ 25 LINDA M. BURROW 26 Attorneys for Defendant UMG RECORDINGS, INC. (both a named 27 defendant and erroneously sued as 28 UNIVERSAL MUSIC GROUP, INC.) CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR -16- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 2 The UMG Defendants hereby demand trial by jury in this action. 3 4 DATED: March 10, 2011 Respectfully submitted, 5 CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR, PC 6 LINDA M. BURROW HEATHER PEARSON 7 8 9 By /s/ 10 LINDA M. BURROW 11 Attorneys for Defendant UMG RECORDINGS, INC. (both a named 12 defendant and erroneously sued as 13 UNIVERSAL MUSIC GROUP, INC.) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-1- UMG DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT