jain.com
Public record. We host this document directly; the copy served here does not depend on any third party. Retrieved November 12, 2026.
Read the documentAlso at archive.org ↗

Hirsch v. Owen — Entry #8

Case: Hirsch v. Owen txwd · 1:19-cv-01037

filed October 23, 2019

What this document is

Docket entry #8 · filed November 04, 2019

Who is involved

Why we have it

We follow this case because it names a company we track, although that company is not a party:

A free copy from the RECAP archive of federal court filings (mirrored at the Internet Archive), retrieved November 12, 2026. Federal court filings are public records.

URL
https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txwd.1064628/gov.uscourts.txwd.1064628.8.0.pdf
Kind
court_filing
Publisher
RECAP
Published
2019-11-04 00:00:00-05:00
Retrieved
2026-11-12 06:51:09.623520-05:00
HTTP status
200
MIME
application/pdf
Bytes
87836
SHA-256
1d2e3558a1be2ae3651dd036ddf9b9fbe91dddf85f704e98d5aad994e233b393

Document text

3 page(s), 6,649 characters, converted from the PDF's text layer · plain text.

Full text
Case 1:19-cv-01037-RP Document 8 Filed 11/04/19 Page 1 of 3

Case t.19-cv-1037-RP Document I Fed 11/4/2019            Page   1   of 3


                        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                                                                                  2019 NOy
                                              For the.                                            H tO: 27
                           WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

STEVEN HIRSCH
     Plaintiff,

V.

                                                   Civil Action No, 1:1 9-cv-1 037-RP
 DOUGLAS WILLIAM OWEN; OWEN MEDIA
 GROUP LLC
     DEFENDANT(s)


       DEFENDANTS' ANSWER IN RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT FOR
        DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FROM COPYRIGHT
                        INFRINGEMENT


Plaintiff Steven Hirsch, for his complaint against Douglas William Owen and Owen Media Group
                  LLC, Defendants (collectively "defendants") answer as follows:

1-3.     Admit.
4.       Admit that Plaintiff alleges that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction as provided by
28 USC § 1331, and 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a)
5.       Admit that Plaintiff alleges that this Court has jurisdiction over the Defendant because the
Defendants principal place of business is in the state of Texas.
6.       Deny the Plaintiff's claim that a substantial part of these events occurred in this ludicial
district. Admit that the Plaintiff alleges that the venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.0 § 1319(b)
7.       Admit plaintiff alleges he is a professional photographer.
8.       Admit plaintiff alleges he is "copyright owner" who holds "exclusive rights" to his
copyrighted works.
9.        Admit.
10.       Defendant denies that he published the Plaintiff's copyrighted work. Admit that the
Defendant's work did appear on the Plaintiff's website.
11.       Admit.
12.       Admit.
13-19. Deny knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth.
20.    Deny.


               Case 1:19-cv-01037-RP Document 8 Filed 11/04/19 Page 2 of 3

Case 1:19-cv-1037-RP Document I Filed 11/4/2019              Page 2 of 3


21.    Defendant denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth.
22.    Deny.
23.    Deny.
24.    Admit.
25.    Deny knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth.
26.    Deny.
27- 31. Defendant denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth.
32- 35. Defendant denies each and every allegation in paragraphs 32-35 of the Complaint.
36.        Deny.
37.        Defendant denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth.

38.    With respect to the prayer contained on pages 8-9 of the Complaint, the Defendant
denies that any of the alleged acts or omissions caused Plaintiffs or the putative class members
any damages and the Defendant denies that Plaintiffs are entitled to recover any damages or
any other relief from him.


      1.   The Defendants' deny plaintiff has sustained any damage, deny the nature and extent of
           damage (if any) and deny they caused plaintiff to sustain any damage.

      2. The Defendants' upon notice, acted in accordance with Title II of the 1998 Digital
         Millennium Copyright Act is known as the Online Copyright Infringement Liability
         Limitation Act (OCILLA) (17 U.S.C. 512)

           DMCA OCILLA proves safe harbors which effectively protect most telecommunications
           companies, internet access providers, bulletin board operators, hosts, intermediaries,
           and "online service providers" of all kinds from contributory or vicarious copyright liability
           based on infringements by hosted subscribers and others whose content is transmitted,
           stored, etc. by such online service providers. See Costar Group, Inc. v. Loopnet, Inc.,
           164 F.Supp. 2d 688 (D.Md. 2001); ALS Scan, Inc. V. RemarQ Communities, Inc., 239
           F.3d 619 (4th Cir. 2001); Hendrickson v. eBay, Inc., 165 F.Supp. 2d 1082 (C. D. Cal.
           2001); Perfect 10, Inc. v. Cybemet Ventures, Inc., 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7333 (Filed
           April 22, 2002 C. D. Cal.). 3. For leading case on scope of safe harbors in context of
           Internet peer-to-peer file sharing, see A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004
           (9th Cir.2001); for analysis of Napster cases, see David L. Hayes, "Advanced Copyright
           Issues on the Internet,"
           http://www.fenwick.com/docstore/355lAdvanced_Copyright_02-29- 04.pdf.

      3. It is the Defendants' policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with
         the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other


            Case 1:19-cv-01037-RP Document 8 Filed 11/04/19 Page 3 of 3
Case 1:19-cv-1037-RP Document I Filed 11/4/2019            Page 3 of 3


       applicable intellectual property laws. It is Defendants' policy to remove material from
       public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally
       copied and distributed by any of our members or users. It is also the Defendants' policy
       to terminate the accounts of repeat offenders. If the Defendants' remove or disables
       access to comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act he will make a good-faith
       attempt to contact the owner, author, or administrator of each affected site so that they
       may make a counter notification pursuant to sections 51 2(g)(2) and (3) of that Act.

The Defendants' reserve the right to file an Amended Defendant's Answer with the Court to
plead additional verified pleas, affirmative defenses and claims, cross-claims or third-party
claims, as applicable, after further investigation and discovery.

WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request that this Court:

i. Enter judgment on Defendants' behalf on each of the counts in Plaintiff's complaint;


ii. Dismiss the complaint with prejudice,


lii. I also ask for such relief as the court finds equitable and just.


Dated November 4, 2019                                                   Respectfully submitted,


                                                                                       Defendants
                                                                         DOUGLAS WILLIAM OWEN;
                                                                         OWEN MEDIA GROUP LLC
                                                                                  2400 Willow Way
                                                                             Round Rock, Tx 78664