Zuffa Files Lawsuit Seeking To Shut Down livevss.tv & livevss.net

On October 8, 2010, Zuffa filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada against Daniel Wallace, an individual allegedly (upon information and belief) residing in Selsey, West Sussex, England, for "copyright infringement, trademark infringement, unfair competition and trademark dilution under federal statutes, with pendent state and/or common law claims for trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage." (hat tip Robert Joyner @robnashville). 

Zuffa alleges that, "[u]pon information and belief, Defendant owns and operates a website located at livevss.tv (“Defendant’s Website”), as well as a referring site at livevss.net (“Referring Website”)" and that "Defendant regularly broadcasts “live streams” of pay-per-view events, including MMA contests and exhibitions, boxing, and wrestling matches, for free on Defendant’s Website."

The crux of the complaint is the allegation that: 

Upon information and belief, given that events are streamed for free on Defendant’s Website, Defendant derives revenue from selling advertising space on the website such that the viewer is continuously bombarded with “pop up” ads during any given broadcast.  Defendant has previously offered unauthorized “live streaming” video of Copyrighted Broadcasts, including, but not limited to, UFC 119, which took place on September 25, 2010

Zuffa also alleges that:

"[b]ased upon Defendant’s history of offering 'live streaming' of Plaintiff’s past events, as well as those of other MMA providers, Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant will similarly offer an unauthorized 'live streaming' video of UFC 120 on October 16, 2010, the date of the event.  Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant will 'live stream' UFC 120 to Internet viewers for free. The authorized live broadcast of UFC 120 will occur on the Spike TV cable television channel in the United States, but the event will be pay-per-view in Australia.

To prevent any future allegedly unauthorized streaming, Zuffa also filed a emergency application for an ex parte temporary restraining order and motion for preliminary injunction.  In the motion Zuffa seeks "injunctive relief to prevent Defendant from uploading, displaying, copying, adapting, sharing, using, exhibiting and/or disseminating Plaintiff’s Copyrighted Broadcasts [], including, but not limited to, Plaintiff’s October 16, 2010, broadcast of UFC 120, including an order disabling the Defendant’s website and domain names for the pendency of the litigation."

Zuffa also provided a proposed temporary restraining order that provides in relevant part as follows:

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT, pending a full trial on the merits:

A. Defendant, defendant’s agents, servants, employees and/or all persons acting in concert or participation with defendant are prohibited from copying, manipulating, adapting, reproducing, uploading, distributing, sharing, selling or displaying any of Plaintiff’s Copyrighted Broadcasts and are prohibited from copying, manipulating, adapting, reproducing, uploading, distributing, sharing, selling or displaying UFC 120 in any manner;
B. The domain name registrar, eNom, Inc., is ordered to take possession of and domain name registrations and ensure that they are not accessible to Internet uers [sic] until the Court rules on Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction;
C. A nominal bond of $100 shall be required because the evidence indicates that Defendant will only suffer, if at all, minimal damage by the issuance of this temporary restraining order and injunction. 

If this sounds familiar, it should. 

As I reported in my posts, including, inter alia, Zuffa Files Lawsuit Seeking Injunction Preventing Potential Stream of UFC 118 at hq-streams.com, Zuffa Gets Its Temporary Restraining Order Prohibiting Stream of UFC 118 at hq-streams.com, and Tike (hq-streams.com) Stipulate to Permanent Injunction in Zuffa Streaming Action, Zuffa successfully obtained a permanent injunction last month putting a stop to alleged streams of UFC events at hq-streams.com.

The major difference I see here -- other than the obvious fact that in the United States UFC 120 will be on Spike and not on ppv -- is that Tike was allegedly in New York (albeit at a parking lot address according to the process server) whereas Wallace is in the UK.

Thus, there is an interesting international law issue involved. 

In this regard, to the extent that Zuffa's proposed order here provides that "eNom, Inc., is ordered to take possession of and domain name registrations and ensure that they are not accessible to Internet uers [sic] until the Court rules on Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction," note that in the hq-streams dispute Zuffa provided a proposed order with similar language directed at "GoDaddy.com, Inc." and that the Court did not include this langauge in the TRO it entered.

Fight Lawyer