UPDATE
On May 8th and May 29th the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey entered a Temporary Restraining Order
and Preliminary Injunction which Orders remain in full force and effect, enjoining “[t]he Defendants, Mark Haefeli and Mark Haefeli Productions, Inc., or anyone of them, or any other entity under Mr. Haefeli’s control, and those in active concert with them (the “Defendants”), or receiving instructions and requests from them, including social media outlets, receiving notice of this Order are preliminary enjoined, pending resolution of this action on the merits, from (a) editing, altering, reproducing, distributing, or otherwise publicly displaying the Film…, (b) offering for sale, selling, marketing or promoting the Film…, (c) creating derivative works derived from the Film …, (d) engaging in acts of interferences with Plaintiff’s marketing and selling of the Film…, (e) engaging in any other acts which puts a cloud on the ownership, development or distribution of the Film… and more. (View the full Preliminary Injunction )
To provide further background on this action, Mark Haefeli signed an agreement whereby, inter alia, Mr. Haefeli was regularly compensated, created the Film in issue on behalf of 4C4 and otherwise assigned all right, title and interest in and to his work while a member of 4C4 to 4C4.
In light of some issues Haefeli had during production and editing, he personally (and without 4C4’s knowledge) posted allegedly disparaging and damaging remarks and claims about Brian Brodeur and East Main Media. See Brodeur Complaint. For example, Mr. Haefeli, in the context of the attached Complaint posted the following defamatory statement about Mr. Brodeur and his company:
Thereafter, and after having failed to take those posts down, Mr. Haefeli’s wrongful conduct embroiled 4C4 in the defamation lawsuit embodied in the Brodeur Complaint. Thereafter, and after refusing 4C4’s attempts to assist Mr. Haefeli with that matter (which he failed to understand or appreciate), Mr. Haefeli, as he does today, chose to attack 4C4. As result, 4C4 parted ways with Mr. Haefeli. Notwithstanding the agreements that Mr. Haefeli signed assigning all right, title and interest in and to, inter alia, the Film in issue, Mr. Haefeli, as you know if you are reading this, has undertaken a “scorched earth” effort to harass Plaintiff “out of” the Film. For example, and in the context of the Federal Court Complaintand R. Gregory’s Certifications:
Again, the Temporary Restraining Order and the Preliminary Injunction remain in full force and effect, and 4C4 will be renewing by way of a formal motion, its application for a finding of contempt.
We will continue to keep you posted.
*original post
The McHattie Law Firm, in a sweeping copyright and tortious interference victory, obtained a Temporary Restraining Order, and in turn, a Preliminary Injunction from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. (see Complaint, Certification, Order, Response and Preliminary Injunction here)
Confronted by a disgruntled former member and contractor who it is alleged absconded with various assets, including copyright and other intellectual property assets, the Firm devised, applied for and obtained an ex-parte Temporary Restraining Order to protect the copyright and business reputation of its client. Thereafter, the Firm conducted and persuaded the Court to grant the client’s application for a Preliminary Injunction for the duration of the matter.
When faced with infringement of intellectual property, a Temporary Restraining Order, and in turn, a Preliminary Injunction, are intended to restore the status quo ante, and allow the dispute to be resolved by the Court based on the facts and circumstances as they existed prior to the infringing or wrongful conduct. A Preliminary Injunction often represents a significant “win” and often leads to the resolution of the matter as the Court is required to determine who, amongst the parties, is likely to win on the merits after a full trial. Because the burden is so high, normally a party who has lost reconsiders its conduct and more often than not, changes it. In order to prevail, and in addition to demonstrating a likelihood of success on the merits, the party making the application must also show: (a) it is more likely than not to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, (b) a balance of equities tips in its favor and (c) the requested injunction is in the public interest.
Here, the Preliminary Injunction was issued by the Court to protect the Firm’s Client’s intellectual property, here in particular a documentary film about Tony Bongiovi’s Power Station recording studio, where the likes of Bruce Springsteen, Madonna, Lady Gaga, Bruno Mars, Herbie Hancock, Bobby McFerrin, Christian Marclay, Paul McCartney, the Rolling Stones, Dire Straits, John Mayer and Esperanza Spalding all made amazing recordings. The unreleased Film (with the working titles “Billion Dollar Power Station” and “Power Station When Worlds Collide”) documents the studios origins as a Con Edison power relay station, a television studio where “Let’s Make A Deal” with Monty Hall was produced, and ultimately a recording studio where innumerable hits were recorded, perhaps more hits than any other recording studio in history! http://powerstation.nyc/about/recordings/
In this case, the Defendant was improperly disseminating, distributing and claiming ownership of Plaintiff’s copyrighted works and otherwise interfering with Plaintiff’s ability to proceed with the Film project. While the Preliminary Injunction does not resolve the matter on the merits, it provides a critical and decisive moment in the case and will hopefully change the course of the dispute, and as is the norm, perhaps the defendant in that case will reconsider his conduct and change it.
The case can be found and monitored at https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28141579/4C4_MEDIA,_LLC,_v_HAEFELI_et_al