In Jacobs et al v. The Journal Publishing Corporation et al, 1-21-cv-00690, District Judge Martha Vazquez of the District Courtroom of New Mexico a short while ago held Plaintiffs’ twenty-two-month delay in filing accommodate rebutted any presumption of irreparable damage for alleged copyright violations, and accordingly denied Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.
In the scenario, Plaintiffs had been arrested for white collar crimes, and shortly thereafter the Albuquerque Journal published an on the net post talking about Plaintiffs’ indictment and information of the alleged crimes. Plaintiffs objected to a number of features of the post, in particular a photograph it contained. Plaintiffs claimed that two of the Defendants trespassed onto their property and stole a physical duplicate of the photograph for use in the post. Plaintiffs’ also claimed that the Albuquerque Journal’s subsequent use of the photograph was a copyright violation.
Plaintiffs submitted for a preliminary injunction to take away the short article from all internet sites inside of the Albuquerque Journal’s manage, notify all other internet sites making use of the allegedly stolen impression that the Albuquerque Journal did not have copyright and ask for that these web-sites eliminate the graphic, to manage all financial data pertaining to the photograph and other unauthorized photos, to halt any ongoing or impending pursuits related to the photograph, and to offer Plaintiffs with documentary proof that the Albuquerque Journal has complied with these specifications.
In assistance for their ask for for a preliminary injunction, Plaintiffs argued that reputational problems and likelihood of confusion can constitute irreparable damage. Even so, reputational damage is not inherently irreparable. And, although copyright infringement can itself be a type of irreparable hurt absent evidence of misplaced income or other concrete economic damages, a rebuttable presumption of irreparable may perhaps also utilize in copyright circumstances. In other text, the Courtroom reasoned copyright infringement alone could constitute irreparable damage in some scenario, but that presumption can be rebutted by other variables this sort of as a hold off in filing go well with as in this case.
Particularly, the Court docket located Defendants rebutted any presumption of irreparable hurt by pointing out the twenty-two-month delay among when Plaintiffs allege that they learned the short article and the time that they filed go well with. The Courtroom also reasoned that the reputational harms that Plaintiffs allege primarily acquire the sort of dropped enterprise opportunities, which are compensable, and that Plaintiffs gave no indication that even more damage will take place in the long run.
For these good reasons, the Court observed that if any presumption of irreparable damage applies for the alleged copyright violations, Defendants have rebutted it. Consequently, the Court docket found that Plaintiffs are unable to meet the irreparable damage component necessary for a preliminary injunction, and denied Plaintiffs’ ask for for a preliminary injunction.
This case acts as a solid reminder to not delay in filing accommodate, especially if a person needs to seek preliminary relief or otherwise build irreparable hurt as even a just one to two-calendar year delay in filing go well with may well be enough to rebut any presumption of irreparable harm.