A federal judge from the Middle District of Georgia has dismissed the claim of a plaintiff, who alleged that the University of Georgia and several individual defendants within the athletic department used “professional materials, music, dances, lyrics, voices, songs, and entertainment,” which the plaintiff had allegedly created, without compensating the plaintiff.
The court found, specifically, that the school was entitled to immunity, while a claim against a football game announced was dismissed as frivolous.
The claim was brought by Louis E Williams, who represented himself in the litigation. Williams alleged that he wrote a song in junior high school, Dooley Junkyard Dogs, which has been played over the past 40 years, in alleged violation of his copyright.
He named the UGA Athletics Department, Vince Dooley, Damon Evans (as UGA Athletics Director), Greg McGarity (as UGA Athletic Director), Mark Richt (as UGA head football coach), Larry Munskin (football announcer), Fred C. Davis (as UGA President), Michael F. Adams (as UGA President), and the UGA Board of Regents as defendants.
In his complaint, the court wrote that he generally states that he “demands $30 million for the use of his professional materials, music, dances, lyrics, voices, songs, entertainments, and etc., thereby, causing him, damages and incorrigible and irreparable injuries.”
The plaintiff also claimed that he “helped Mr. Vince Dooley to have winning seasons in football” and to “become Athletics Director for a number of years” because Dooley used the plaintiff’s “professional materials.” Further, he demanded “another $50 million for the harms, hurts, wrongs and damages and incorrigible and irreparable injuries” and claimed that the defendants are subjecting him to “cruel and unusual punishment.”
In addition to the copyright infringement, the court concluded that the plaintiff “may be attempting to state a claim against the defendants for a violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
The plaintiff moved to proceed in forma pauperis in his action, leading to the judicial determination.
“A copyright infringement claim is thus barred by sovereign immunity if brought against a state or state entity,” wrote the court, citing Nat’l Ass’n of Bds. of Pharmacy v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. Sys. of Ga., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32116, 2008 WL 1805439, at 16 (M.D. Ga. 2008). Similarly, his Eighth Amendment claim was also barred by sovereign immunity.
The only remaining defendant, not protected by sovereign immunity, was football commentator Larry Munskin.
The court began its analysis by quoting the plaintiff’s allegations that Munskin “used” the plaintiff works until he retired by saying, while on the air: “Y’all come on and play, that, James Brown Song; Dooley Junkyard Dogs Ronnie Swope, he will hit you and he will knock you. Dooley Junkyard Dogs The Benches are Rocking and Bending. Dooley Junkyard Dogs.”
The court continued, noting that “to state a claim for copyright infringement, a plaintiff must show: ‘(1) ownership of a valid copyright, and (2) copying of constituent elements of the work that are original.’ Latimer v. Roaring Toyz, Inc., 601 F.3d 1224, 1232-33 (11th Cir. 2010). To satisfy [the] first prong, a plaintiff must prove that the work . . . is original and that the plaintiff complied with applicable statutory formalities. Id. A ‘certificate of a registration made before or within five years after first publication of the work shall constitute prima facie evidence of the validity of the copyright and of the facts stated in the certificate.’ Id. (quoting 17 U.S.C. § 410(c)).”
The plaintiff did not “allege in his complaint that he has ownership of a valid copyright in any material.” He also did not allege that “he created an original piece of work, that he obtained a copyright over that work, or that defendant Munskins has somehow copied parts of that work that are original. At most, the plaintiff has alleged in a conclusory fashion that he wrote a song in junior high school, which has been played over the past 40 years, and that defendant Munskin would ask that that song be played on the radio. Even giving the plaintiff every benefit as a pro se complainant, these allegations clearly do not state a claim for copyright infringement against defendant Munskin. In other words, his complaint is based on an ‘indisputably meritless’ legal theory. Carroll v. Gross, 984 F.2d 392, 393 (11th Cir. 1993). As such, the plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).”
Louis E. Williams v. University of Georgia Athletics Department, et al.; M.D. Ga.; CASE NO. 3:10-CV-81 CDL-MSH, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134214; 11/24/10
