Contact Us Today! (877) 276-5084

Attorney Steve® Blog

Piracy cases that may help you in your case G&G Closed Circuit Cases

Posted by Steve Vondran | May 21, 2018 | 0 Comments

Attorney Steve® Boxing Piracy Defense [Joe Hand, J&J, G&G) - Information resources.  If you received a call, letter, or email demanding money, call us at (877) 276-5084.

illegal broadcast lawyer

Make sure all the soccer, UFC fights, boxing championship fights are properly licensed for display in your commercial establishment.  We can help if there is a dispute involving proper licensing.


Our copyright and federal litigation law firm is a leader in representing Defendants (usually small bar owners - often minority and immigrant run restaurants, bars, and clubs) accused of showing a fight at their establishment without purchasing the proper commercial license.  These cases can start as innocently as having an aggressive lawyer from Pasadena calling you to threaten a federal court lawsuit if you do not pay a large damage request (last one I heard was for $50,000).  These companies can be extremely aggressive and over-the-top.  In my opinion, they like to go after the smaller businesses with threats of litigation.  They are more than threats however, because they CAN and DO file hundreds if not thousands of lawsuits over the years.

How did they find out I showed the fight?

Some common things they do are:

1.  They will find you advertising the fight on social media websites like facebook

2.  They will assume you are going to broadcast the fight illegally (they will check to see if your business purchased a COMMERCIAL - not PERSONAL license).

3.  They will send one or more private investigators into your business (pretending to be a customer, but there to catch evidence of illegal broadcasting).  They will photograph the TV's, but we also saw one photo where they photographed the waitress (for some odd reason)

4.  The information will draft a declaration stating they saw you show the fight on TV (via cable or satellite or internet feed) and send these along with the pictures to the law firm that will handle the case.  We have dealt with many law firms.

5.  Next thing, you may get the dreaded phone call, or letter accusing you of violating copyright law and/or the federal telecommunications laws.  Then, the game begins.

This is typically how it goes.  To make matters worse, the IP lawyers for the fight companies will usually NOT SHARE ANY EVIDENCE, which to me is bogus.  If you are accusing a company of wrongdoing you should be willing to show the evidence, but they will not typically do that.

Weighing Monetary Demands vs. Potential Damages in Default Judgment

Key Cases in Boxing Piracy

As you can see, there have been a ton of cases filed in the boxing litigation arena (what we call TV Signal piracy cases - which can be satellite or cable) and sometimes streaming internet.  We will be briefing more of these cases as time permits.

  • Bronco Wine Company v. Frank A. Logoluso Farms (1989) 214 Cal.App.3d 699
  • Cablevision of Michigan, Inc. v. Sports Palace, No. 93-1737, L994 U.S. App. LEXIS 13914, at. *11-13 (5th Cir. June 5, 1994)
  • Cablevision v. Skyes (2nd Cir. 1993) 997 F.2d 998
  • Carnegie Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 350 (1988)
  • Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391 (1926)
  • Don King Prods. v. Maldonado (N.D. Cal. 1996) WL 682006
  • Fleuti v. Rosenberg, 302 F.2d 652 (9th Cir.1962)
  • Garden City Boxing Club, Inc. v. Frezza (2007) 476 F. Supp.2d 135, 140
  • Goldman v. United States, 316 U.S. 129, 134 (1942)
  • Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972)
  • Integrated Sports Media, Inc. v. El Guadalajara, Inc., 2011 WL 4434165, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 30, 2011)
  • J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Ferreyra (2008) WL 4104315
  • J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Flores, 2012 WL 6608915 (E.D. Cal., December 18, 2012, at *11)
  • J & J Sports Prods. v. Hernandez (2010) U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48191
  • J & J Sports Productions, Inc. vs. Hot Shots, 2010 WL 3522809
  • J & J Sports Prod., Inc. v. J.R.'Z Neighborhood Sports Grille, Inc., No. 9-3141, 2010 WL 1838432
  • J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Man Thi Doan (N.D. Cal. 2008) WL 4911223
  • J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Manzano (2008) U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84931
  • J & J Sports Productions, Inc. vs. Romenski, 845 F.Supp.2d 703 (2012)
  • J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Schmalz, 745 F.Supp.2d 844 (S.D. Ohio, Sept. 17, 2010)
  • J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Steve Sang Ro (2010) U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21425
  • J & J Sports Productions, Inc. vs. Welch, 2010 WL 4683744
  • Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Alvarado, 2011 WL 1740536 at *8 (E.D.Cal., May 4, 2011)
  • Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Dailey (N.D. Cal. 2003) WL 1342998
  • Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Dock Street Enters. Inc., No. 11-1973, 2011 WL 6141058, at *5 n. 5 (D.Md., Dec. 8, 2011.)
  • Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. vs. Jacob Evans Albright d/b/a Miners Ranch Saloon, 2013 U.S. Dist.
  • Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Kaczmar, 2008 WL 4776365, *2 (N.D.Ill. Oct.29, 2008)
  • Joe Hand Promotions, Inv. v. Pete (N.D. Cal. 1999) WL 638215
  • Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, (1967)
  • Kingvision Pay-Per-View, Ltd. v. Backman (N.D. Cal. 2000) 102 F.Supp.2d 1196, 1197
  • Kingvision Pay-Per-View v. Guzman (N.D. Cal. 2009) WL 1475722
  • Kingvision Pay Per View v. Ortega (N.D. Cal. 2002) WL 31855367
  • Kingvision Pay-Per-View, Ltd. v. Rivers 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4338, p. 11.)
  • Planned Parenthood of Cent. and Northern Ariz. v. State of Ariz., 718 F.2d 938, 947 (9th Cir.1983)
  • Premium Sports Inc. vs. Connell, 2012 WL 691891 (S.D.N.Y. March 1, 2012)
  • Small Company v. American Sugar Refining Co., 267 U.S. 233, 239 (1925)
  • Smith v. Cincinnati v. Post & Times-Star, 475 F.2d 740, 741 (6th Cir. 1973)
  • That's Entmt. V. Anciano's, Inc., No. 94 C 7199, 1996 WL 514989, at *1 (N.D. Ill. 1996)
  • Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston, 469 U.S. 111, 126–27 (1985)
  • United States v. Makowski, 120 F.3d 1078, 1080 (1997)
  • United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715 at 726 (1966)
  • Universal Sports Network, Inc. v. Jiminez (N.D. Cal. 2002) WL 31109707
  • Village of Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, 455 U.S. 489, 498 (1982)
  • Zuffa, LLC v., Inc., 838 F.Supp.2d 1102 (D. Nev. 2012)

The "ESPN Defense"

Sometimes we will encounter what we call the "ESPN Defense."  This is where someone buys the fight via an application believing they have the rights to do what they want with it.  However, there is usually a disclaimer license that limits what can be done with the fight (usually, only using it for personal, non-commercial broadcasts).  Here is what a typical warning might look like:

"Your subscription to the ESPN+ service (and any other services or events ordered via ESPN+) is a personal, revocable, non-exclusive, non-commercial, non-transferable license to privately stream the content made available to you via the service.  We do not allow transmission of the ESPN+ service (or any other services or events ordered via ESPN+) for any commercial or business related use or in any commercial establishment or area open to the public (e.g., lobby, bar, restaurant, diner, stadium, casino, club, cafe, theater, etc.).  You may not rebroadcast, transmit or perform the programming available via the ESPN+ service (or any other services or events ordered via ESPN+) or charge admission for its viewing."

Contact a Boxing Piracy Defense Law Firm

We have helped many companies both large and small over the years defend against companies like Janis and the Riley Firm.  In this area of law, there is no substitute for experience, especially litigation experience as that's where many cases are headed if demands are not paid.  We have appeared in over 200 litigation cases since 2004 and we are licensed to practice law in California and Arizona. 

Call us at (877) 276-5084 or email us through our contact form.

About the Author

Steve Vondran

Thank you for viewing our blogs, videos and podcasts. As noted, all information on this website is Attorney Advertising. Decisions to hire an attorney should never be based on advertising alone. Any past results discussed herein do not guarantee or predict any future results. All blogs are written by Steve Vondran, Esq. unless otherwise indicated. Our firm handles a wide variety of intellectual property and entertainment law cases from music and video law, Youtube disputes, DMCA litigation, copyright infringement cases involving software licensing disputes (ex. BSA, SIIA, Siemens, Autodesk, Vero, CNC, VB Conversion and others), torrent internet file-sharing (Strike 3 and Malibu Media), California right of publicity, TV Signal Piracy, and many other types of IP, piracy, technology, and social media disputes. Call us at (877) 276-5084. AZ Bar Lic. #025911 CA. Bar Lic. #232337


There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Contact us for an initial consultation!

For more information, or to discuss your case or our experience and qualifications please contact us at (877) 276-5084. Please note that our firm does not represent you unless and until a written retainer agreement is signed, and any applicable legal fees are paid. All initial conversations are general in nature. Free consultations are limited to time and availability of counsel and will depend on the type of case you are calling about (no free consultations for other lawyers). All users and potential clients are bound by our Terms of Use Policies. We look forward to working with you!
The Law Offices of Steven C. Vondran, P.C. BBB Business Review