Trombetta v. Novocin

Background

Annamarie Trombetta, proceeding without a lawyer, alleged that defendants advertised and sold a painting online while falsely representing that she created it. She alleged that the false listing harmed the value of her artwork and caused lost sales. Her original complaint asserted claims under the Lanham Act, the Copyright Act, the Visual Artists Rights Act, the New York Civil Rights Law, and the New York Artist’s Authorship Rights Act.

In an earlier round of this case, the District Court dismissed with prejudice her New York Civil Rights Law claims, New York Artist’s Authorship Rights Act claim, and Lanham Act trademark-infringement claim. It dismissed her Copyright Act claim without prejudice and allowed her Visual Artists Rights Act claim to proceed. The court instructed her that any amended copyright claim should refer to and attach her copyright-registration certificate.

Trombetta later sought permission to amend her complaint, add William Seippel and Worthpoint.com Corporation as defendants, and assert additional claims. The court treated her opposition filing, which included the copyright-registration allegations and attachment, as the operative proposed amended complaint because it was the clearest and most complete statement of her claims.

Rulings on Previously Dismissed Claims

The court denied Trombetta’s request to reassert the claims that had already been dismissed with prejudice: claims under Sections 50–51 of the New York Civil Rights Law, Section 14.03 of the New York Artist’s Authorship Rights Act, and the Lanham Act. It deemed those claims stricken from the amended complaint.

The court found that Trombetta had corrected the defect identified in her earlier copyright claim by including allegations about her copyright registration and attaching the registration. It therefore granted her motion to amend to include a direct copyright-infringement claim against the EAI Defendants—Norb Novocin, Marie Novocin, and Estate Auctions Inc.

New Claims

The court granted Trombetta permission to assert a contributory copyright-infringement claim against the Worthpoint Defendants—William Seippel and Worthpoint.com Corporation. A contributory-infringement claim requires allegations that a defendant knew or should have known about another person’s infringement and materially helped that infringement. The court found that Trombetta’s allegations about her communications with Worthpoint employees and Seippel plausibly alleged that the Worthpoint Defendants knew or should have known that the online post infringed her copyright.

The court also granted permission to add claims under Sections 1202(a) and 1202(b) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act against both the EAI Defendants and the Worthpoint Defendants. Those provisions address false, removed, or altered copyright-management information when the defendant acts with the required knowledge and intent. The court found that Trombetta plausibly alleged that the online posts included copyright-management information, such as her name, biographical information, and website address, and that defendants removed or altered that information. The court also found her allegations and supporting correspondence sufficient at the pleading stage to allege the required knowledge and intent.

The court denied Trombetta’s request to add a defamation claim. Under New York law, the claim was subject to a one-year filing deadline. The court concluded that even using the May 9, 2017 reposting date alleged by Trombetta, the deadline was May 9, 2018, while she first asserted defamation on February 21, 2020. The court therefore found the claim untimely and dismissed it with prejudice.

Disposition

The court’s motion to amend was granted in part and denied in part. The following claims were to proceed: the Visual Artists Rights Act claim against the EAI Defendants; the direct copyright-infringement claim against the EAI Defendants; the contributory copyright-infringement claim against the Worthpoint Defendants; and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act claims under Sections 1202(a) and 1202(b) against the EAI Defendants and the Worthpoint Defendants. The previously dismissed New York Civil Rights Law, New York Artist’s Authorship Rights Act, and Lanham Act claims were stricken with prejudice, and the defamation claim was dismissed with prejudice.

The court deemed Trombetta’s filing the operative amended complaint, directed her to serve it on Seippel and Worthpoint.com, and gave Novocin, Marie Novocin, and Estate Auctions Inc. until April 2, 2020, to answer. Judge Sarah L. Cave signed the Opinion and Order.