Drone Racing League Was Our Idea, Tech Enthusiasts Say
Justice Laub and Daniel Kanes had what they were sure would be TV dynamite: televised drone races. The Southern California tech enthusiasts lined up a…
October 03, 2017 at 08:30 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Justice Laub and Daniel Kanes had what they were sure would be TV dynamite: televised drone races. The Southern California tech enthusiasts lined up a TV production deal in 2015 and a $250,000 investment from New York entrepreneur Nicholas Horbaczewski.
Today the Drone Racing League is indeed a big hit. Its events are broadcast on ESPN and Sky Sports. The league raised a $20 million investment in June. Horbaczewski is being lauded for building DRL from the ground up.
But Laub and Kanes say they've received nothing, according to a federal court complaint filed last week in Los Angeles. The two say they had a deal with Horbaczewski, who hadn't flown a drone or seen a race before meeting them, that called for each to be 33 percent owner of the company.
Instead, Horbaczewski absorbed their ideas for making drone racing compelling TV while secretly cutting them out of the company, they allege. “The truth was that Horbaczewski intended to steal plaintiffs' ideas and the entire DRL for himself,” Laub and Kanes' attorneys at Bartko Zankel Bunzel & Miller write in the Sept. 27 complaint. DRL is now worth as much as $100 million, they allege.
Horbaczewski and DRL haven't formally answered yet, but in a notice of removal to federal court their attorneys at Morrison & Foerster say the oral and written contracts decribed by Laub simply don't exist. “Mr. Laub has no right to any interest in DRL, and he only asserted his meritless claims after the public announcement of a large private investment in DRL,” MoFo partner Kenneth Kuwayti wrote.
A company spokesperson said the league “vehemently denies the claims made. However, we do not comment on pending litigation.”
Horbaczewski and DRL have also sued Laub in New York state court for a declaration that Laub is not an owner. According to the complaint, as Horbaczewski built DRL, Laub tentatively agreed to work as an independent contractor for a 1 percent stake that would vest over four years. But Laub never performed any work for the company and months later Horbaczewski withdrew the offer.
The written contract alleged by Laub and Kanes does sound pretty vague. They point to a March 2015 business plan that says “at this time we are thinking 33 percent Dan, 33 percent Justice and 33 percent Nick” as the capital structure.
But the two plaintiffs, who are represented by Bartko partners Patrick Ryan and Stephen Steinberg, tell a story with at least surface appeal for potential jurors.
The plaintiffs allege they pitched their idea to Blank Paige Productions in 2015 and began seeking investors. Los Angeles VC Matthew Mazzeo referred them to Horbaczewski, at the time a sales executive at a company that staged obstacle course races.
Over the next couple of months Laub and Kanes shared their ideas for the league, which they described as “Nascar for the gaming generation.” It was they who had the idea to use neon lights for the drones and race course features, and to capture video from multiple perspectives and then edit it together for presentation as a “live” event, they allege.
Horbaczewski liked the idea and along with investing $250,000 agreed to work as CEO and business developer. Laub and Kanes would focus on race logistics, drone community outreach, location scouting and fan interaction. Horbaczewski requested their bios and head shots for use in investor pitches, they allege.
Kanes even offered to pitch in his own $250,000 in seed money. “But Horbaczewski refused and insisted that plaintiffs had already done their part by bringing Horbaczewski into the venture and providing all of their ideas,” according to the complaint.
In the meantime, Blank Paige had come back with a one-year offer to develop the show. On Horbaczewsi's advice, “plaintiffs rejected the lucrative offer, and assigned their rights in the TV show to the new company that they were starting with Horbaczewski.”
But shortly thereafter, Horbaczewski incorporated DRL in Delaware without documenting Laub's or Kanes' ownership or issuing them any shares. By the end of the year he cut off contact with them, according to the complaint.
The plaintiffs call it “a cynical plot to steal their ideas for a televised drone racing league, claim all the credit for himself, and cheat them out of their rightful ownership of two-thirds of the Drone Racing League.”
Scott Graham writes about intellectual property and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Contact him at [email protected]. On Twitter: @ScottKGraham
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTesla, Musk Appeal Chancery Compensation Case to Delaware Supreme Court
2 minute readFatal Shooting of CEO Sets Off Scramble to Reassess Executive Security
5 minute readBen & Jerry’s Accuses Corporate Parent of ‘Silencing’ Support for Palestinian Rights
3 minute readShareholder Activists Poised to Pounce in 2025. Is Your Board Ready?
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250