POW Nevada Statement of Claim and Package (redacted)

SIMPLIFIED
ACTION
FEDERAL
COURT
POW NEVADA, LLC
- and -
DOE #1 et. al.
(see Schedule 1 for list of Defendants)
STATEMENT OF
CLAIM
TO
THE DEFENDANTS
Court File
No. 1 - -
C / 3 -
Plaintiff
Defendants
A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by the Plaintiff. The
claim made against you is
set out in the
following pages.
IF YOU
WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, you or a solicitor acting for you are
required to prepare a statement of defence in Form 171B prescribed by the Federal Courts Rules
serve it on the plaintiffs solicitor or, where the plaintiff does not have a solicitor, serve it on the
plaintiff,
and file it, with proof of service, at a local office of this Court, WITHIN 30 DAYS after this
statement of claim is
served on you, if you are served within Canada.
If you are served
in the United States of America, the period for serving and filing your
statement of defence is forty days. If you are served outside
Canada and the United States of
America,
the period for serving and filing your
statement of defence is sixty days.
Copies of the Federal Court Rules
information concerning the local
offices of the Court
and other necessary
information may be obtained on request to
the Administrator of this Court
at
Ottawa (telephone
613-992-4238) or at any local
office.
IF YOU FAIL
TO DEFEND THIS
PROCEEDING, judgment may be given
against you in
your absence and without
further notice to you.
Date:
MAR
1
6
2018
Issued by:
Address of Local
Olfic I e
TA1NA
WONG
REGISTRY
OFFICER
,r
(Registry
Officer)
• '
180
Queen Street
West
Suite 200
Toronto, ON M5V 3L6

TO:
THE ADMINISTRATOR
Federal Court
AND TO: Various
Defendant
Does as per
Schedule 1 hereto

3
THIS ACTION IS BEING BROUGHT AGAINST YOU UNDER
THE
SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURE PURSUANT TO RULE 292 OF
THE FEDERAL COURTS RULES
CLAIM
1.
The
Plaintiff claims:
(a) a
declaration that each Defendant has
infringed the Plaintiffs copyright in the
cinematographic work, Revolt (the
"Work") contrary to ss. 27(1) and 27(2) of the
Copyright Act as a result of the
Unlawful Acts (as that term is defined below);
(b)
a
declaration
that the
Plaintiff
owns the
copyright in
the Work;
(c) a
declaration that copyright subsists in the Work;
(d) an
interim,
interlocutory and
permanent
injunction
restraining each Defendant, and
any and
all persons acting on behalf of or in
conjunction with such Defendant,
and
any
and all persons with notice of
such injunction from infringing the
copyright in
the
Work, including by way of the
Unlawful Acts;
(e) an
Order
granting a
"wide
injunction" pursuant to s. 39.1
of the
Copyright Act,
further
enjoining each
Defendant
from infringing the
copyright in any other work
or
subject
matter in
respect of which
the
Plaintiff is the
owners
of the copyright;
(f)
(g)
damages
for infringement of
the Work in
accordance with s. 35 of
the Copyright
Act and, in addition to those
damages, such part of the profits that the Defendant
has made from
the infringement that
were
not taken into
account in
calculating
the
damages as this Honourable Court considers
just;
in the alternative to the damages for copyright infringement set out in 1(f), above,
at the Plaintiff's election at any time before final judgment is rendered, statutory
damages pursuant to s. 38.1(a) or 38.1(b) of the Copyright Act, as the case may
be;
(h) pre -judgment and
post
-judgment
interest in
accordance with
sections 36
and 37 of
the
Federal
Court
Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7;
(i)
costs of this action on a solicitor and
client scale together with applicable taxes, or
in the alternative, any other scale that is just;

4
0)
relief in accordance with Rule 298(2) to permit motions to:
(i)
identify the
anonymous Defendants;
(ii)
amend the
Statement of Claim to add
further
Defendants or remove
Defendants, as the
case may be; and
(iii) case manage this
action; and
(k) such
further
relief as
is requested by the
Plaintiff and that
this Honourable
Court
finds
just.
THE
PARTIES
The
Plaintiff and the Copyright
in the Work
2.
The
Plaintiff, POW
Nevada, LLC
("Plaintiff')
is a movie
production company that produces
cinematographic
works.
3.
The Work is a
2017 science -fiction film.
4. The Plaintiff is the
owner of the copyright in the Work.
Each Defendant's Wrongful
Conduct
5. Each
"Doe" Defendant (a "Doe
Defendant")
is a person
whose
name and identity is
currently
unknown
to
the
Plaintiff. Each Doe
Defendant has
unlawfully, and
without the
Plaintiff's authorization or consent, utilized the BitTorrent peer -to -peer network to
download and/or unlawfully offer to upload the Work thus infringing the Plaintiff's copyright
in
the Work. Each other Defendant, as the case may be, was a "Doe"
Defendant but has
subsequently been
identified.
6. Each
Defendant has been identified by the internet protocol
("IP") address used by the
Defendant when performing
the Unlawful
Acts, as set
out
in Schedule 1 to
this
Claim.
7.
Specifically,
but
without limitation, the Defendant
engaged in
the
Unlawful
Acts at
least on
the
dates and times
set out in Schedule
1 to this Claim.

5
8. In
accordance with the
provisions of s. 41.25
and s. 41.26 of the
Copyright Act each
Defendant was notified of his or her
Unlawful Acts by Notice a
first notice (the "First
Notice"). The First
Notice informed each Defendant
that they had been detected
by
forensic software as offering for upload the
Work, and indicated that if the Work was taken
down that there
would be no action taken as against
such Defendant. Each Defendant
failed to respond, or refused to respond, to the First
Notice and continued his or her
Unlawful Acts.
As a result of each
Defendant's failure to respond to the First
Notice and his or her
continuation of the Unlawful Acts, a
second notice (the "Second
Notice") was sent to the
Defendant by counsel for the Plaintiff after the
forensic software detected that the same
IP
address was offering for upload the same Work. This Second
Notice indicated that the
work had not been removed
and that legal action may be taken
as against such Defendant.
The Defendant failed or refused to respond
to the Second Notice and has continued
his
or her
Unlawful
Acts.
10. In each
case, the forensic software has
downloaded a significant portion of
the Work from
each Defendant to
confirm that the Work was in fact
being offered for upload, and
each
Defendant
has uploaded such portion of
the Work without
authorization from the Plaintiff.
THE UNLAWFUL
OFFER TO UPLOAD THE WORK
11.
Through custom -designed
software designed to track
copyright infringements,
and the
online identities of those
who commit such
infringements (by way of IP address
and time
of infringement), the Plaintiff
has identified many
thousand instances of its films
(including
the Work) being
illegally offered for
"download" from individuals
using the Internet.
12.
Such users
offering the Work for
"download" are
said to be
"uploading" such Work.
"Uploading" and
"downloading" are
terms of art in
respect of computer file
transfers on the
internet. A
user "uploads" a
computer file to
someone who
requests the file
from such
user. A
user "downloads"
a computer
file from
someone who
"uploads" that file to
them.
In other
words, an
"uploader" offers a
Work for
download and
when requested,
sends that
file
(or a
portion of that file)
to the
downloader. A
computer file
can, for
example, be a
copy of a Work.