Intellectual Property | Copyright Infringement | Technology | Software

J&J Sports Production, Inc. 2017 lawsuit updates

Jul 26th, 2017 | By | Category: Satellite TV Signal Piracy

 Does J&J Sports Production, Inc. file lawsuits for cable TV piracy?  2017 updates.

cable tv satelllite attorney


If you received a legal demand letter from the Law Offices of Thomas P. Riley (Pasadena) this is likely a valid letter that you may have to (unfortunately) deal with.  Some clients have thought the letter was not legitimate and ignored it only to find out it is a valid letter.  This is an important public notice and if you are not if a letter or email you received is not valid call us for a free initial review.  As noted below, Plaintiffs are very aggressive and you could be facing both civil and criminal penalties and potentially a laws suit exceeding $100,000 in monetary damages.

NOTE: We accept cases from around the United States subject to local court rules.

Federal Court case search

Using the federal pacer search tool I noticed that federal lawsuits have been filed in the following state district courts:

  1. California (Central District)
  2. Alabama
  3. Phoenix, Arizona
  4. Arkansas
  5. Missouri
  6. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
  7. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
  8. Anchorage, Alaska
  9. Nashville, Tennessee
  10. New York (Eastern District)
  11. Maryland
  12. Texas (Southern District)
  13. South Carolina
  14. Ohio

Here is a partial list of the case numbers (you may have to sign up for an account to view the case documents):

caedce 2:2017-cv-00945
alsdce 1:2017-cv-00189
alsdce 2:2017-cv-00190
azdce 2:2017-cv-01322
azdce 2:2017-cv-01320
azdce 2:2017-cv-01321
azdce 2:2017-cv-01323
cacdce 2:2017-cv-03297
cacdce 8:2017-cv-00776
caedce 2:2017-cv-00926
casdce 3:2017-cv-00886
azdce 2:2017-cv-01284
cacdce 2:2017-cv-03272
aredce 3:2017-cv-00094
cacdce 2:2017-cv-03199
cacdce 2:2017-cv-03204
cacdce 2:2017-cv-03209
cacdce 2:2017-cv-03213
cacdce 2:2017-cv-03222
cacdce 2:2017-cv-03229
moedce 4:2017-cv-01405
moedce 4:2017-cv-01406
moedce 4:2017-cv-01407
moedce 4:2017-cv-01408
moedce 4:2017-cv-01409
paedce 2:2017-cv-01963
paedce 2:2017-cv-01964
akdce 3:2017-cv-00096
aredce 4:2017-cv-00277
aredce 4:2017-cv-00278
paedce 5:2017-cv-01945
paedce 2:2017-cv-01938
paedce 2:2017-cv-01941
paedce 2:2017-cv-01942
paedce 2:2017-cv-01936
paedce 2:2017-cv-01937
paedce 2:2017-cv-01939
paedce 2:2017-cv-01940
paedce 5:2017-cv-01960
paedce 2:2017-cv-01991
pamdce 1:2017-cv-00746
pamdce 1:2017-cv-00745
nysdce 1:2017-cv-02681
tnmdce 3:2017-cv-00694
cacdce 2:2017-cv-02655
paedce 2:2017-cv-01578
azdce 2:2017-cv-01025
azdce 2:2017-cv-01027
azdce 2:2017-cv-01026
cacdce 2:2017-cv-02628
cacdce 2:2017-cv-02631
cacdce 2:2017-cv-02638
cacdce 2:2017-cv-02641
cacdce 2:2017-cv-02642

All said, looks like over 50 lawsuits filed across the country.

The Complaint may “swing for the fences”

The complaints will normally allege violations of federal law including:

  • Violation of Title 47 U.S.C. Section 605 [Communications Act of 1934]
  • Violation of Title 47 U.S.C. Section 553 [The Cable & Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992]
  • If you are sued in California a claim under business and professions code section 17200 may also be alleged.

Here is one clip relating to the allegations that the owner knew about the illegal broadcasting:

“Plaintiff is informed and believes, and alleges thereon that on Saturday, May 7, 2016 (the night of the Program at issue herein, as more specifically defined in paragraph 14), Defendant XXXXX specifically directed or permitted the employees of XXXX Barbershop to unlawfully intercept and broadcast Plaintiff’s Program at XXXX Barbershop, or intentionally intercepted, and/ or published the Program at XXXX Barbershop herself. The actions of the employees of XXXX Barbershop are directly imputable to Defendant XXX by virtue of her acknowledged responsibility for the operation of XXXX barbershop.”

This allegation seeks to take care of the “I didn’t do it myself” defense or the “I didn’t know anything about this.”

Remedies sought

Here is some language from one federal lawsuit I reviewed which shows the types of remedies that may be sought in a case:

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as set forth below.

As to the First Count:

1. For statutory damages in the amount of $110,000.00 against the Defendant and

2. For reasonable attorneys’ fees as mandated by statute, and

3. For all costs of suit, including but not limited to filing fees, service of process fees, investigative costs, and

4. For such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper;

As to the Second Count:

1. For statutory damages in the amount of $60,000.00 against the Defendant and

2. For reasonable attorneys’ fees as may be awarded in the Court’s discretion pursuant to statute, and

3. For all costs of suit, including but not limited to filing fees, service of process fees, investigative costs, and

4. For such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper.

Is broadcasting a fight for commercial purposes without a license a crime?

Some clients have asked me “will I go to jail?”  Technically there are civil and potential criminal penalties under the law.  However, most cases can be resolved on a civil basis.

Potential Defenses

Here is one case that talks about being authorized by a cable operator.

Contact a cable / satellite tv piracy defense lawyer

If you are the owner or operator of a barber shop, pizza joint, sports bar, restaurant, night club, strip club, poker room, or other entertainment establishment and received a notice of lawsuit, call us for a free initial consultation.  We can be reached at (877) 276-5084.  In most cases we can offer a low flat rate fee (predictable fee) to represent you to try to get your case settled.

The following two tabs change content below.
We are a business and civil litigation firm with a focus on copyright infringement cases involving illegal movie downloads (torrent cases such as London Has Fallen, ME2 Productions and Malibu Media defense), software audits (ex. Microsoft audits, SPLA, Autodesk audit notification letter, Siemens PLM defense, SIIA, Adobe and Business Software Alliance defense) and other software vendors threatening piracy and infringement. We also handle cases involving internet law, anti-SLAPP, media law, right of publicity, trademarks & domain name infringement, and we have a niche practice area handling California BRE licensing disputes, accusations, subpoena response, statement of issues and investigations. We have offices in San Francisco, Beverly Hills, Newport Beach, San Diego & Phoenix, Arizona and accept federal copyright and trademark cases nationwide. All content on our website is general legal information only and not a substitute for legal advice, and should not be relied upon. Decisions to hire counsel should not be based on advertising alone. Blogs, videos and podcasts are authored by Steve Vondran, Esq. unless otherwise noted. We can be reached at (877) 276-5084.

Latest posts by Vondran Legal - Civil Litigation firm handling Software audits, Copyright Infringement, Internet law, and general Business & Real Estate law (see all)

Comments are closed.