Judge Kimba Wood
Young-Wolff licensed copyrighted photographs to McGraw-Hill, which represented intent to use them in limited distribution publications, and that copies of the photos would be retained, if at all, for archival purposes only. Some 2,210 images are at issue in Young-Wolff’s suit alleging McGraw-Hill’s infringement of copyright by exceeding limited license agreements, publishing his photos absent permission, and reusing photos absent a valid license. Young-Wolff did not ascertain the extent of McGraw-Hill’s use of his images. The court dismissed his infringement claim. Despite otherwise satisfying requirements for a copyright infringement claim as set out in Kelly v. L.L. Cool J., Young-Wolff did not allege the time during which McGraw-Hill infringed his copyrights. His complaint did not “contain a single date or reference to a time period.” As such defect is curable the court granted leave to replead. Discussing Senisi v. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Pub’g Co. the court dismissed, with prejudice, Young-Wollf’s claim for a declaratory judgment premised on a right to an audit under the Copyright Act.Nothing in the Copyright Act gives a copyright owner the right to sue a licensee for declaratory judgment to obtain an audit, which is a contractual right.
