Doeman Music Group Media And Photography LLC v. DistroKid, LLC

Background

Judge Margaret M. Garnett had previously entered a default judgment on liability in favor of Doeman Music Group Media And Photography LLC against Raquella “Rocky Snyda” George. A default judgment is a judgment entered when a party does not defend the case. Judge Garnett then referred the matter to United States Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky for a damages inquest, meaning a proceeding to determine the amount of damages.

Judge Tarnofsky’s scheduling order required Doeman to provide evidence allowing the court to determine damages with reasonable certainty. Any request for actual damages had to be supported by declarations or affidavits and admissible documentary evidence. George submitted nothing opposing Doeman’s damages request.

Claimed damages and deficiencies

Doeman requested $10,000 for streaming revenue allegedly lost while its song and album were unavailable because of George’s takedown notice. Its submissions referred to more than 60,000 monthly YouTube views and 74,800 monthly views after the song was reposted, but did not identify which streaming platforms had removed the music. A supporting screenshot did not explain where the data came from, how it was obtained, or what it measured. Doeman estimated that comparable streams during the takedown period would have produced $1,000, and also asserted that the takedown affected the album’s other songs, live performances, and Sirius XM radio airplay.

Doeman also requested $15,000 for lost live-performance revenue. It reasoned that, if the music had remained available for streaming, Damien Wilson would have tried to perform it and would have gained more recognition and revenue. The submissions did not make clear whether the claimed amount involved reduced revenue at concerts or performances that were never booked. Doeman did not state that Wilson had performed the affected music or earned revenue from such performances before the takedown notice, and it provided no documentation for calculating the claimed loss.

Order

Judge Tarnofsky found that Doeman had not yet shown the full amount of its claimed damages with reasonable certainty. Because Doeman had attached some documentation and the problem might have been an inadequate explanation of that documentation, the court gave Doeman another opportunity to supplement its submission.

The court ordered Doeman, no later than March 5, 2025, to provide explanations and materials sufficient to permit a reasonable calculation of damages. The supplemental filing had to include an affidavit from someone with knowledge identifying each affected streaming platform, the song and album streams before the takedown period, how each platform calculated streaming revenue, and Doeman’s damages calculations. It also had to identify concerts where the song was performed before the takedown period, performances allegedly lost during that period, and the method for calculating any lost performance revenue. This order did not determine or award the requested damages.