Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 3, 2023

ACE Pictures, Inc. v. Tech Times LLC

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:22-cv-03709
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
6
Intellectual PropertyCivil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In ACE Pictures v. Tech Times, Judge Carter granted $6,400 in damages, fees, and costs after Tech Times defaulted in a copyright case.

Who this affects

ACE Pictures, Inc. received a total monetary judgment of $6,400 from Tech Times LLC: $5,000 in statutory damages, $960 in attorney’s fees, and $440 in costs.

What happened

ACE Pictures, Inc. sued Tech Times LLC for copyright infringement. Tech Times did not answer or participate, and the court had already entered a default judgment finding Tech Times liable. This order decided how much money ACE Pictures should receive.

The court granted ACE Pictures’ request for damages. It awarded $5,000 in statutory copyright damages, $960 in attorney’s fees, and $440 in costs, for a total of $6,400. The court relied on ACE Pictures’ unopposed submissions but noted that ACE Pictures provided no licensing-fee history or other evidence of its actual losses.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. entered judgment for ACE Pictures in the total amount of $6,400. The order did not change the earlier liability ruling; it set the monetary award that followed Tech Times’ default.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
ACE Pictures, Inc. v. Tech Times LLC · No. 1:22-cv-03709
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Oct. 3, 2023

Background

ACE Pictures, Inc. brought a copyright-infringement action against Tech Times LLC. The Clerk entered a certificate of default after Tech Times failed to plead or otherwise defend. ACE Pictures moved for default judgment, and on August 28, 2023, the court entered default judgment in ACE Pictures’ favor as to liability. The court then ordered Tech Times to explain why damages should not be awarded. Tech Times did not respond or otherwise participate. ACE Pictures later filed proof that it had served that order.

Legal standard

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 provides a two-step process for default judgment: the Clerk first enters a certificate of default, and the court may then enter judgment. A default admits well-pleaded allegations concerning liability, but it does not admit the amount of damages. A plaintiff seeking damages must provide enough evidence to establish the amount with reasonable certainty. The court may decide damages from affidavits and documents without holding a separate hearing.

Damages

ACE Pictures elected statutory damages rather than actual damages and requested $5,000. The Copyright Act generally permits statutory damages from $750 to $30,000 per work, with a possible increase for willful infringement. The court considered factors including the alleged infringer’s state of mind, saved expenses and profits, the copyright holder’s lost revenue, deterrence, cooperation in providing evidence, and the parties’ conduct.

The court stated that infringement is treated as willful by virtue of a defendant’s default. However, ACE Pictures did not provide evidence of its licensing fees, actual losses, or other information concerning the value of the infringement. The court nevertheless found that deterrence supported an award and concluded that the requested $5,000 was not unreasonably high. It awarded $5,000 in statutory damages.

Attorney’s fees and costs

The court also stated that the Copyright Act permits a prevailing party to recover reasonable attorney’s fees and full costs. It awarded ACE Pictures $960 in attorney’s fees and $440 in costs.

Disposition

The court granted ACE Pictures’ request for damages and entered judgment in favor of ACE Pictures for $5,000 in statutory damages, $960 in attorney’s fees, and $440 in costs, totaling $6,400. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.