Culbert and ExplodingDog - Red Robot Complaint PDF

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 1 of 44
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
---------------------------------------------------------------x
:
ADAM CULBERT and
:
EXPLODINGDOG LLC,
:
:
Plaintiffs,
:
v.
:
:
THEODORE S. LIGETY,
:
ANOMALY ACTION SPORTS, INC., and
:
ANOMALY ACTION SPORTS, SRL,
:
:
Defendants.
:
-------------------------------------------------------------- x
Civ Case No.
15-1563
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT, TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT,

UNFAIR COMPETITION, DECEPTIVE TRADE AND SALES PRACTICES AND
UNJUST ENRICHMENT
Plaintiffs Adam Culbert and Explodingdog LLC, by and through their undersigned
counsel, hereby set forth this Complaint against Theodore S. Ligety, Anomaly Action Sports,
Inc. and Anomaly Action Sports, Srl.
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1.
This is an action for an injunction, damages and other appropriate relief arising
out of Defendants direct and indirect violations of Section 106 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C.
101, et seq. (hereinafter the Copyright Act), Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.
1125, as well as Defendants trademark infringement, unfair competition, deceptive trade
practices, and deceptive sales practices under the state and common law of the State of
Connecticut in connection with Mr. Culberts Explodingdog Red Robot character.
2.
At the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, United States Olympic alpine skier
Theodore (Ted) S. Ligety (Ligety) wore a helmet that featured a reproduction or derivative
of Adam Culberts copyrighted Red Robot character and his Red Robot trademark without
ever contacting Adam Culbert (Mr. Culbert) for permission or license to use his Red Robot.
3.
According to the business model of the skiing equipment company that Ligety
founded, Ligety would wear products in competition -- including the unauthorized helmet he
wore at the Olympics with the Red Robot design, that his skiing equipment company would soon
sell worldwide due to the massive exposure of Ligetys success before an Olympic-sized
audience. At no time did Ligety or the skiing equipment company ever obtain permission or
license to use Mr. Culberts Red Robot design or trademark.
4.
Despite the protests of Mr. Culbert, Ligety continued to wear the unauthorized
helmet in competitions into the 2014/2015 FIS World Cup ski season and to this day Anomaly
Action Sports, Inc. and Anomaly Action Sports, Srl continue to offer the unauthorized Red
Robot helmet and other unauthorized Red Robot products for sale, all to the damage and harm of
Adam Culbert and his Explodingdog LLC business.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5.
This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 1 7 U.S.C.
101, et seq., 15 U.S.C. 1121, and 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1338, and 1367(a) and the U.S.
Constitution because this Complaint raises federal questions under the Copyright Act, the
Lanham Act, and it involves state causes of action, including claims of copyright infringement,
statutory and common law trademark infringement, unfair competition, unfair trade practices,
and false advertising.
6.
Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400(a) because, inter
alia, Defendants have engaged in a significant amount of business activity in this District and a
substantial amount of infringing activity occurred in this District.
7.
Defendants are subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court because, inter
alia, Defendants have engaged in a significant amount of business activity in this District and a
substantial amount of infringing activity occurred in this District, including, on information and
belief, Defendants actively promote their products in Connecticut and have authorized dealers in
Connecticut to sell the infringing products, and have sold infringing product in Connecticut.
PARTIES
8.
Plaintiff Adam Culbert is an individual residing at 7 Cobbs Road, West Hartford,
CT, 06107.
9.
Plaintiff Explodingdog, LLC is a Connecticut limited liability corporation with its
principal place of business at 7 Cobbs Road, West Hartford, CT, 06107.

10.
Upon information and belief, Defendant Theodore S. Ligety (Ligety) is an
individual residing in Park City, Utah.

11.
Upon information and belief, Defendant Anomaly Action Sports, Inc. (Anomaly
USA), is a New Hampshire corporation with its principal place of business at 7 Central Square,
New Boston, NH 03070.
12.
Upon information and belief, Defendant Anomaly Action Sports, Srl. (Anomaly
Srl), is an Italian company with its principal place of business at Viale Ancona, 26 30172
Venezia-Mestre, Italy. Anomaly USA and Anomaly Srl are sometimes collectively referred to as
Anomaly and hereinafter all three Defendants are sometimes referred to as Defendants).
BACKGROUND
Adam Culbert and Explodingdog.com
13.
Adam Culbert (Mr. Culbert) is an illustrator and author under the pseudonym
Sam Brown most noted for his explodingdog website, <explodingdog.com>. Explodingdog
LLC is an entity Mr. Culbert formed to oversee his business related to his artwork.
14.
The explodingdog.com website is a crowd-sourced comic blog that works under
the concept that visitors of the explodingdog.com website send Mr. Culbert short phrases for
inspiration and he picks certain ones to illustrate. The drawings are titled with the inspiration
phrase and drawn and rendered digitally. Mr. Culberts illustrations are known for their
distinctive style and their poignant and sometimes unexpected take on the phrases on which they
are based.
15.
Mr. Culberts artwork has been presented on his explodingdog.com website since
2000 at <www.explodingdog.com> and on his Tumblr page since 2008 at

<www.explodingdog.tumblr.com>. Both websites have archives of Mr. Culberts past artwork.
16.
Mr. Culbert has used many recurring visual motifs and characters and recurring
themes in his explodingdog work. The visual motifs, in addition to the Red Robot character
that is the subject of the present case, include stick figures, fish, birds, stars, clouds, monsters,
and menacing cityscapes. Some of the reoccurring themes are loss, love, joy, loneliness,
menace, confusion, and freedom.
17.
Mr. Culbert and his work have been featured in many newspapers and
publications, including in the New York Times, USA Today, Wired magazine, the Austin
4
Chronicle, on the Bostonist website, The Morning News website, and BPM magazine. Examples
of these articles can be found at Exhibit A.
18.
Mr. Culbert has also written a number of books of art and short stories under his
pseudonym which are based in part on the art of his website:
Wish For Something Better (2001, Explodingdog LLC, ASIN B002WZRKNQ);

New Job (2002, Explodingdog LLC, ISBN 0971710503);
Amazing Rain (2004, Soft Skull Press, ISBN1932360506);
Thinking of You (2004, Explodingdog LLC, ISBN 0971710511);
Thinking of You 2 (2006, Explodingdog LLC, ISBN 9780971710528);
Explodingdog 2001 (2007, Explodingdog LLC, ISBN 9780971710535); and
Sometimes I Forget Youre A Robot (2013, Dial Books, ISBN 0803738250)
19.
Over the fifteen years since Mr. Culbert has launched the explodingdog.com
website in 2000, his work has grown a large and loyal following.
20.
Mr. Culbert supports himself and his family through his art, creativity, and
illustrations from his explodingdog body of work.

21.
Mr. Culbert has sold merchandise related to his art since 2000. In addition to
original artwork and individual prints of his explodingdog artwork, Mr. Culbert sold his books
and apparel, including t-shirts and hoodies. The explodingdog ecommerce used to be found on
the explodingdog.com website. Since 2008, Mr. Culbert has moved his ecommerce store
website to his Building a World website at <www.buildingaworld.com>.
22.
Mr. Culbert has licensed two entities, TopatoCo and Nuvango, as well as their
predecessors, to produce and sell explodingdog merchandise based upon his artwork, and
receives royalties for those sales. This merchandise includes apparel, greeting cards, prints, and
skins for laptops and phones featuring reproductions of his explodingdog illustrations. Mr.
Culbert had also previously licensed Urban Outfitters to use an explodingdog illustration. Aside
from his book publishers, Soft Skill Press and Dial Books (a Division of Penguin Books), Mr.
Culbert has not granted permission to use his intellectual property to others and has diligently
policed the market for unauthorized reproductions and derivatives.
23.
Mr. Culbert obtained copyright registrations in his explodingdog.com artwork for
his complete works from each of the years 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003. Printouts of the
Copyright Office records for these registrations are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
24.
Mr. Culberts 2-Dimensional artwork titled explodingdog 2000 from his body
of work from explodingdog.com from the year 2000 is protected by U.S. Copyright Registration
No. VA 1-633-758 with a registration date of January 29, 2008. The registered artwork can be
found at <http://explodingdog.com/2000.html> and thumbnails of the registered artwork of
explodingdog 2000 are provided at Exhibit C.
25.
No. VAu 965-393 with a registration date of January 29, 2008. The register artwork can be
explodingdog 2001 are provided at Exhibit D.
26.
No. VA 1-635-885 with a registration date of February 4, 2008. The registered artwork can be
explodingdog 2002 are provided at Exhibit E.
27.
No. VA 1-642-892 with a registration date of February 4, 2008. The register artwork can be
explodingdog 2003 are provided at Exhibit F.
The Red Robot
28.
Mr. Culbert first introduced the Red Robot to explodingdog as an on-going
character and motif in January 2000. The copyrighted illustration shown below, entitled thats
disgusting was first published on explodingdog.com in July 2000 and is an example of an early
illustration of the Red Robot.
29.
Mr. Culberts work struck an instant chord with his audience, and as a pioneer in
online crowd-source comics, the popularity of the explodingdog.com website was immediate.
7
The Red Robot was a large part of that appeal, and the Red Robot character created a strong
association between the Red Robot and the e xplodingdog website.
30.
The Red Robot has appeared continuously in Mr. Culberts work over the
past 15 years. The copyrighted illustration shown below, entitled and youll find me, crying,
crunched compactly into a ball in the corner of the room all sad and depressed-like was part of
explodingdog 2001.
31.
The copyrighted illustration shown below, entitled my friends are going to save
the world was part of explodingdog 2002.
32.
The copyrighted illustration shown below, entitled painting a rainbow was part
of explodingdog 2003.
33.
There are dozens of illustrations including the Red Robot character in the
registered copyrighted collections of explodingdog 2000, explodingdog 2001,

explodingdog 2002, and explodingdog 2003, as seen in Exhibits C-F.
34.
And over the course of illustrating explodingdog, Mr. Culbert has drawn hundreds
of examples of the Red Robot. Each Red Robot is hand-drawn by Mr. Culbert, and the resultant
uniqueness in the character and in each line stroke is evident in his work. Some more examples
of the Red Robot are shown in the collage below:
10
35.
The Red Robot was first incorporated into merchandise in October of 2000 when
t- shirts with the character were offered for sale online. Since then, Mr. Culberts artwork
including the Red Robot has been featured on all types of explodingdog merchandise sold by Mr.
Culbert and his licensees.
36.
This link to the internet archive at archive.org is of the explodingdog.com store in
2001 selling Red Robot shirts:

<https://web.archive.org/web/20010604065808/http://www.explodingdog.com/shirtorder/index.h
tml>. This link to the internet archive at archive.org is of the explodingdog.com store in 2004
selling Red Robot shirts and hoodies:
<https://web.archive.org/web/20040815022336/http://explodingdog.com/shirtorder/index.html>.
Copies of these archived pages are found at Exhibit G .
37.
At Exhibit H is an example of explodingdog merchandise where the robot city
illustration featuring the Red Robot is reproduced on a t-shirt and sold by licensee TopatoCo.
Below and at Exhibit I are examples of explodingdog merchandise where the i like birds
illustration featuring the Red Robot is reproduced on apparel, phone and electronics cases and
skins, and throw pillows that are sold by licensee Nuvango.
11
38.
As one of the most prominent characters of explodingdog, the Red Robot
appeared in each of Mr. Culberts books published after 2001.

39.
Sometimes I Forget Youre A Robot is Mr. Culberts most recent book and the
Red Robot is the featured character. It was published on October 17, 2013 by the Penguin Youth
Readers Group, Dial Books. It is a childrens book about a little boy who has always dreamed of
having his own robot, and in his imagination, the little boys toy robot is the Red Robot. Below
are images of the front and back covers of Sometimes I Forget Youre A Robot illustrating the
Red Robot with the boy in the book.
40.
The artwork and text of Sometimes I Forget Youre A Robot are protected by U.S.
Copyright Registration No. TX 7-852-372 with a registration date of February 7, 2014. A

printout of the Copyright Office records for TX 7-852-372 is attached at Exhibit J.
12
The RED ROBOT Trademark

41.
The popularity of the character created a strong association between Red
Robot and Mr. Culberts Explodingdog website and artwork. This association was enhanced
by Mr. Culberts decision to use the Red Robot as the logo and trademark for his online
store front at the Building a World website.
42.
Since launching the Building a World website in 2008, a Red Robot has been
used in conjunction with the website and the ecommerce conducted from the website to sell
explodingdog merchandise. At first, the logo was a standing Red Robot, as seen on the
spine of the Sometimes I Forget Youre A Robot hardcover book.
43.
Continuously and exclusively since June 2012, Mr. Culbert has used a sitting
Red Robot logo (the RED ROBOT trademark) in connection with his online retail store
services at the Building a World website.
44.
The RED ROBOT trademark is shown below:
45.
The RED ROBOT trademark is also shown below, as it is consistently used
to identify the Building A World website, which is the Explodingdog ecommerce store, at
the top of the website and adjacent to the BUILDING A WORLD trademark.
13
46.
The RED ROBOT trademark has also been continuously and exclusively
used since June 2012 on all Building a World invoices, packing slips and letterhead in the
same manner.
47.
Fans and admirers of Mr. Culbert and of his explodingdog website and
consumers of his artwork and explodingdog merchandise have come to associate the RED
ROBOT trademark with Mr. Culberts artwork and the sale of apparel and merchandise
featuring reproductions of his artwork.
48.
As a result of this use over many years to identify Mr. Culbert's retail
services for artwork and the sale of apparel and merchandise featuring reproductions of
artwork, the RED ROBOT trademark has attained a high level of strength and
distinctiveness in the minds of general public and consumers and serves as a means by
which those goods and services are distinguished from those of other companies in the
market.
Background on Defendants
49.
Ted Ligety is an American alpine ski racer and a two-time Olympic gold medalist
as well as a winner of five World Cup Giant Slalom titles and four World Championship gold
medals.
14
50.
As a result of his success as a skier, Ligety has received valuable endorsements
from some of the worlds most famous companies and brands. On information and belief, Ligety
has been endorsed by Putnam Investments, Audi, Head, and GoPro, amongst others. On
information and belief Ligety has appeared in television commercials for Procter & Gambles
Vicks NyQuil and DayQuil, Walgreens, Citibank, and Kelloggs in advance of the 2014 Winter
Olympics in Sochi.
51.
On information and belief, following his Olympic gold medal at Turin in 2006,
Ligety started Shred Optics, a ski equipment company. Shred Optics products are sold under the
Shred trademark.
52.
On information and belief, Shred Optics produces ski goggles, sunglasses, and
helmets and Ligety designs all the products and uses them himself in competition.
53.
On information and belief, Ligety is also a co-founder, along with Carlo Salmini,
of the brands Shred Optics and Slytech Protection, brands now owned and distributed by
Anomaly.
54.
On information and belief, Defendant Ligety is the President of Defendant
Anomaly USA as well as a member of the Board of Directors of Anomaly USA. Attached as
Exhibit K is the Anomaly Action Sports Inc.s 2015 Annual Report filed with the States of New
Hampshire.
55.
Upon information and belief, Anomaly USA is a subsidiary of Anomaly Srl.
Exhibit L is a press release titled Anomaly Action Sports Srl Assumes Ownership and
Operations of Shred and Slytech Brands from Cersal Srl starting January 1st, 2011.
15
56.
Upon information and belief, Anomaly maintains a website to advertise, sell,
and offer for sale its Shred products at <www.shredoptics.com>.

57.
Upon information and belief, additionally, Anomaly also utilizes a
distribution channel of dealers throughout the country and the world, made up of
authorized ski equipment shops, including in Connecticut to sell its products into
Connecticut and worldwide.
Defendants Marketing Strategy
58.
Upon information and belief, on or around June 2013, Ligety credited his success
in the skiing World Cup, where he wore and marketed Shred products, as a reason for his
companys progress and success. At Exhibit M is a copy of June 12, 2013 article on the website
Malakye.com titled Anomaly Action sports Q&A with co-founders Carlo Salmini and Ted
Ligety.
59.
Upon information and belief, Ligety leverages his skiing success to grow not just
his personal brand, but his company's brand as well. Speaking of Shred to the NY Times, Ligety
explained that I did it to make money to. . . .[Shred] has let me leverage who I am as an athlete
into a product. At Exhibit N is a copy of a February 12, 2014 article in the NY Times titled
Told to Be Realistic, Ted Ligety Defied His Doubters.
60.
Upon information and belief, it is part of Anomaly's business model to have
Ligety prominently wear Shred products in competition to increase sales of those products due to
the massive exposure of Ligetys skiing before a world-wide audience. And Ligety is not
circumspect about his dual role and interests as an athlete and a business man. Ligety explained
to Inc, My priority is skiing fast, but I think that's in line with what's good for our business. The
16
better I do, the more exposure we get. At Exhibit O is a printout of an article from the
February 2014 issue of Inc. magazine titled Olympic Skier Ted Ligety's Other Job:
Entrepreneur.
61.
Upon information and belief, Ligety and Anomaly hoped to enhance this business
model by having Ligetys exposure and success while wearing Shred products at the 2014
Winter Olympics in front of an Olympic-sized audience result in even greater exposure and
further increased sales of those Shred products. Ligetys Olympic appearance was intended to be
a major marketing opportunity for Anomaly and Anomaly was banking on a big boost from the
Sochi Olympics, which took place from February 7-23, 2014.
62.
Upon information and belief, on or around January 2014, Federico Merle,
Anomalys Chief Financial Officer and Chief Marketing Officer stated that Theres going to be
200 million people from all over the world looking at our athletes . . . It would cost a lot of
money to buy that kind of advertising. At Exhibit P is a copy of an article titled A Sports
Accessory Startup Hopes to Seize the Sochi Moment dated January 30, 2014 in Business Week.
According to Anomaly, there is no better promotion for a ski equipment company than to win
gold in the Olympics.
63.
Upon information and belief, Ligety and Anomalys marketing strategy paid off,
with the Shred products worn by Ligety benefitting from an Olympic sized audience with
Anomaly's Shred trademarks featured prominently on Ligetys goggles and helmets. The gear
that Ligety chooses to wear in competition is not just a personal choice, but also a business
decision.
17
64.
Upon information and belief, the buzz surrounding Ligetys skiing to win gold
medals at the Sochi Olympics, along with the branding on his helmets and goggles, was so
immense, it appeared to have crashed the Anomaly website where Shred products were sold.
65.
Upon information and belief, on the night that Ligetys gold-medal winning
performance was televised on NBC, according to a report by Business Insider, the

shredoptics.com website showed an Internal Server Error during the broadcast, suggesting the
server was overloaded. At Exhibit Q is an article titled Ted Ligetys Gold Medal Performance
Appears To Have Crashed His Companys Website dated February 19, 2014 from the Business
Insider.
66.
Upon information and belief, Ligety and Anomaly understand and respect the
importance and power of controlling how the Shred brand and intellectual property are used and
exposed to the public. Unfortunately, that respect did not extend to allowing Mr. Culbert to
control his own brand and intellectual property.
Defendants Infringing Conduct
67.
At the Sochi Olympics, Ligety wore a helmet that featured a reproduction or
derivative of Mr. Culberts Red Robot without Plaintiffs knowledge or permission.
18
68.
No request had ever been made to Mr. Culbert or to Explodingdog LLC for the
right to use, reproduce, sell or offer for sale products with Mr. Culberts Red Robot character or
the RED ROBOT trademark.
69.
The reaction on Mr. Culberts explodingdog websites and social media was
immediate to seeing Ligety wear a helmet with the Red Robot on it at the Olympics. Attached is
a Tumblr message to Mr. Culbert asking Am I nuts or did I see Red Robot riding on Olympic
skier Ted Ligetys helmet tonight at Exhibit R.
70.
This was the first instance that Mr. Culbert became aware of the unauthorized use
of his Red Robot.

71.
Mr. Culbert investigated what he had heard and found pictures of the helmet that
Ligety was wearing. Below is a picture of Ligety wearing the helmet with reproductions or
derivatives of his Red Robot.
72.
Mr. Culbert later became aware that this robot helmet design is known by
Anomaly as the Robot Boogie design. The design from Ligetys unauthorized helmet with red
19
and blue robots will be referred to as the unauthorized Robot Boogie design herein as well for
convenience.
73.
As shown, the unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet Ligety wore at the Sochi
Olympics featured robots that looked substantially similar to the copyrighted Red Robots of Mr.
Culberts explodingdog illustrations.
74.
Also as shown, the unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet Ligety wore at the
Sochi Olympics featured robots that also looked confusingly similar to Mr. Culberts RED
ROBOT trademark.
75.
The image below of an unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet is taken from the
Shred catalog discussed below, and shows in greater clarity the appearance and detail of the
reproductions or derivatives of the robots featured on the unauthorized helmet.
20
76.
Once Mr. Culbert saw the unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet, he immediately
thought of his Sometimes I Forget Youre a Robot book.

77.
This side to side comparison shows that the robots of the unauthorized Robot
Boogie helmet are in similar poses as, and look strikingly similar to, the Red Robot drawing on
the back of Mr. Culberts Sometimes I Forget Youre a Robot book.
78.
The image of the unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet from the comparison
images above is of an unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet purchased online from within
Connecticut and was delivered to Connecticut.
79.
Consumers will and have been confused by Anomalys unauthorized use of Red
Robots on its unauthorized Robot Boogie products. See comparison with the RED ROBOT
trademark below:
21
80.
Having already had his valuable Red Robot character misappropriated without
notice or permission, Mr. Culbert decided to contact Shred to gather more information.
81.
Mr. Culbert emailed Shred directly and inquired if Ligety or Shred were fans of
his art work, if the robot helmet was intended as a one-off, and to see if Shred had an interest in
licensing his Red Robot.
82.
On or around April 3, 2014, Mr. Culbert received a response back directly from
Anomaly. The email exchange between Mr. Culbert and Ms. Troini of Anomaly is attached as
Exhibit S.
83.
The response from Anomaly was that the personal helmets used by Mr. Ligety
for a single race are exclusively his own choice.

84.
Anomaly then admitted that, [A]s you may easily realize, Shred did not (and are
not intentioned to) carry out any search or investigation about the copyrightable or anyway legal
protectable [sic] of such design, nor about any right you may have on it.
85.
Anomaly made clear it was not concerned with any duty or obligation to avoid
infringing on Mr. Culberts rights.

86.
Rather than provide terms for a license, instead Anomaly offered to pay Mr.
Culbert up to $3,000 for his waiver of any claim he may have relating to the use of the Red
Robot design on Shred helmets. Shred demanded a response by April 11, purportedly the last
day to finalize the Shred helmet collection.
87.
However, upon information and belief, the unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet
was already planned for mass production, and it was Anomalys intent all along to have the
unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet in its collection. As it is Anomalys business model to
22
leverage the exposure the Ligetys skiing provides the Shred products into sales, upon
information belief, Ligety wore the unauthorized Robot Boogie on the worlds largest stage
with every intention for Anomaly to sell that helmet.
88.
Mr. Culbert continued his investigation into the unauthorized Robot Boogie
helmet and before he was able to respond to Anomalys April 3, 2014 email, he soon discovered
that Anomaly was in fact already offering the unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet for sale.
89.
Mr. Culbert then engaged intellectual property counsel to represent him and
protect his interests in negotiations that already appeared to be entered into by Anomaly in less
than good-faith, as Anomaly had withheld that it had already been marketing the Robot Boogie
helmet. Over the course of the next several months, other material withheld information would
come to light as well.
90.
On or around April 25, 2015, Katie Lane, Esq. wrote to Anomaly indicating that
despite Mr. Culberts learning of ongoing preparation to mass market and distribute the
unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet without his permission, he would still engage in license
negotiations to allow Anomaly to compensate him for first, the infringement by Ligety of
wearing the unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet at the Sochi Olympics and second, allowing
otherwise unauthorized helmet sales by Anomaly. See Exhibit T, an April 25, 2014 letter from
Katie Lane to Ms. Troini.
91.
Ms. Lane made clear that if a license for the unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet
was not agreed to, that Mr. Culbert would take additional legal action. At that point, negotiations
for Anomaly were taken over by the Italian law firm of Feltrinelli & Brogi.
23
92.
As the negotiations continued slowly, Ms. Lane further made clear that Mr.
Culbert would not permit the continuing unauthorized use of the Red Robot. See Exhibit U, a
June 10, 2014 email from Katie Lane to Andrea Feltrinelli.
93.
Anomaly, through its Italian counsel, never agreed to compensate Mr. Culbert for
Ligetys unauthorized use of the Red Robot at the Olympics, arguing instead that one race at the
2014 Winter Olympics, by Olympic Gold Medalist and worldwide famous ski champion Ted
Ligety did not actually damage anyone but that, on the contrary, gave your Client a very
interesting promotional opportunity. See Exhibit V, a July 1, 2014 letter from Andrea
Feltrinelli to Katie Lane.
94.
Despite Anomalys representation that Ligety wore the Robot Boogie helmet at
only one race in the Sochi Olympics, Ligety continue to wear the Robot Boogie helmet for the
rest the 2013/2014 ski season, including at Kranjska Gora, Slovenia, and at Lenzerheide,
Switzerland for the FIS Mens World Cup in March of 2014.
95.
Further, in its July 1 letter, after several months of negotiation on a license that
Anomaly lead Mr. Culbert to believe was for the Shred unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet,
Anomaly first disclosed that Shred would be interested to continue using the Design on one of
one of its ski helmet and goggle styles (emphasis added).
96.
This attempt by Anomaly to slip in an additional product, a goggle style, into on-
going negotiations without even acknowledging that the goggle was already being offered for
sale made clear that this infringement matter indeed was of very small commercial relevance
to Anomaly, and Mr. Culberts rights were not be taken seriously.
24
97.
Images of an unauthorized Robot Boogie goggle are shown below:
98.
Moreover, it was Anomalys representation now to Mr. Culbert now that only one
helmet style and one goggle style were being considered; however, Anomaly already knew this
to be untrue.
99.
In fact, Anomalys 2014/2015 catalog for Shred Optics and Slytech Protection
offered at least 5 different products for sale using the unauthorized Robot Boogie design -- the
Mega Brain Bucket Robot Boogie Helmet that Ligety wore at the Olympics, plus the Brain
Bucket Robot Boogie Helmet, as well as the Monocle Robot Boogie Goggles, the Hoyden Robot
Boogie Goggles, and the spare goggle strap kit (including an unauthorized Robot Boogie
strap compatible with the Stupefy, Smartefy, Monocle, Soaza , and Hoyden goggles - which
indicates another 3 goggle styles as well). Exhibit W is selected page of the 2014/2015 Shred
Optics and Slytech Protection catalog showing the various unauthorized Robot Boogie
helmets, goggles, and goggle straps offered for sale.
25
100.
Upon information and belief, the 2014/2015 catalog for Shred Optics and Slytech
Protection was printed and distributed without permission or license from Mr. Culbert to use his
Red Robot before Mr. Culbert first contacted Anomaly.
101.
Thereafter, Mr. Culbert purchased an unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet and an
unauthorized Robot Boogie goggle, which were delivered to him in Connecticut.

102.
With the products now available for close inspection, he could examine the details
of the artwork of robots reproduced on the Shred products. As the artist, Mr. Culbert was in the
unique position to be able to identify and map each stroke, each line variation, and hand waiver
of the lines of the robots reproduced on the unauthorized Robot Boogie products to one of his
illustrations in particular. This illustration was titled depression robot wants to malfunction
and is shown below:
26
103.
Mr. Culberts 2-Dimensional artwork titled depression robot wants to
malfunction from his body of work from explodingdog.com from the year 2012 is protected by
U.S. Copyright Registration No. VAu 1-184-402 with a registration date of July 10, 2014. A
printout of the Copyright Office records for No. VAu 1-184-402 provided at Exhibit X.
104.
Upon information and belief, Defendant used the Red Robot from the depression
robot wants to malfunction (hereinafter referred to as the Depression Robot) and digitally
manipulated the image to move the arms, hands, legs, head and eyes to position the red and blue
robots in the unauthorized Robot Boogie design into the positions shown on the products.
105.
Upon information and belief, in the images below, the robots are mirrored, with
the left arm of the Depression Robot put on the right side of the Red Robot on the helmet, and
the right arm of the Depression Robot put on the left side of the Red Robot on the helmet.
27
106.
Below is the comparison of another robot from the unauthorized Robot Boogie
design to the Depression Robot:
107.
Upon information and belief, the left arm of the Depression Robot repositioned on
both the left and side sides of the blue derivative of Red Robot on the helmet.
108.
Upon information and belief, this pattern of manipulating the Depression Robot
was repeated with each robot on the unauthorized Robot Boogie design:
28
109.
Upon information and belief, of course other extremities may have been
repositioned in some robots and the malfunction was fixed in each of the fronts of the robots,
but the design of each robot on the unauthorized Robot Boogie products was taken from Mr.
Culberts Red Robot.
Defendants Infringing Conduct Continues Willfully
110.
It became clear that Anomaly did not respect Mr. Culberts intellectual property.
111.
The evidence of Anomalys direct copying of Red Robot demonstrates a reckless
disregard for Mr. Culbert copyrighted and trademarked Red Robot.

112.
Upon information and belief, this direct copying is a part of a pattern of copying
across other Shred helmet and goggle designs.

113.
On or around December 12, 2014, Michael G. Gabriel, Esq., counsel for
Plaintiffs, wrote Anomaly to inform Defendant that Given your client has been on notice that
the Red Robot helmet is unauthorized pursuant to ExplodingDogs copyright and trademark
rights and that no agreement has been reached with ExplodingDog, we were surprised to see Mr.
Ligety wearing the Red Robot helmet again at the Audi FIS Ski World Cup on December 7,
2014, in Beaver Creek, Colorado. See Exhibit Y, December 12, 2014, and February 9, 2015,
letters from Michael G. Gabriel to Andrea Feltrinelli.
114.
In fact, despite the lack of permission or license, Ligety continued to wear an
unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet in 2014/2015 ski season, not just at Beaver Creek,
Colorado nut also at least at Are, Sweden in the FIS Mens world Cup in December of 2014.
115.
It was clear that Anomaly was not going to cease its on-going infringement nor
engage in meaningful and well-intentioned negotiations from Mr. Culberts perspective focused
29
on getting an accounting of those unauthorized uses, with the hope of still reaching an amicable
resolution. See Exhibit Y..
116.
Despite Mr. Culberts counsel suggestion that Anomaly engage United States
counsel to conduct the negotiations, it did not. Instead, as of March 15, 2015, Anomaly
continued to rely on the faulty premise to avoid infringement. Anomaly:
specifically emphasized that the personal choice of Mr. Ligety to wear the
helmet featuring the Red Robot during the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi
did not certainly cause Adam Culbert any damages (of any kind) but, on
the contrary, represented a great showcase for him considering not only
that Ted Ligety (two-time Olympic gold medalist) is world-renowned as
one of the best ski racers in the world, but also that the Olympics is one of
the events with the highest TV viewership globally.
117.
Anomaly continues to sell unauthorized Robot Boogie helmets and goggles on
its website. See Exhibit Z, printouts from the Anomaly website at <www.shredoptical.com>
from October 19, 2015.
Defendants Unauthorized and Infringing Conduct is Causing Irreparable Harm
118.
Ligety and Anomaly are promoting, offering for sale and selling merchandise
with reproductions and derivatives of Mr. Culberts Red Robot designs and the RED
ROBOT trademark to the same customers as Plaintiff.
119.
On information and belief, Ligety has claimed to have designed all the products
he uses in competition, including the unauthorized Robot Boogie products.

120.
Because of Ligety and Anomalys unauthorized use of the Red Robot,
Defendants are expressly and falsely representing to consumers an affiliation between Mr.
Culbert and Explodingdog LLC and Defendants, and a sponsorship or endorsement of
Defendants by Mr. Culbert and Explodingdog LLC.
30
121.
As a further result of Defendants unauthorized use of the Mr. Culberts RED
ROBOT trademark, Defendants are falsely advertising and luring consumers to purchase
the unauthorized Robot Boogie helmets and goggles based on the reputation and
goodwill of Mr. Culbert and his RED ROBOT trademark.
122.
Consumers purchasing the unauthorized Robot Boogie helmets and
goggles from Defendants are likely to be confused as to the source of the products.
123.
Through this scheme of falsely advertising the unauthorized Robot Boogie
helmets and goggles using Mr. Culberts RED ROBOT trademark and providing
consumers with helmets and goggles not affiliated with Mr. Culbert and Explodingdog
LLC, Defendants are intentionally and willfully creating confusion among consumers.
124.
Defendants emphasis and use of Mr. Culberts RED ROBOT trademark
creates a likelihood of confusion among consumers that their infringing products are
associated or connected with Mr. Culbert and Explodingdog LLC.
125.
At no point in time did Defendants ever acquire any rights in Mr. Culberts
Red Robot designs and the RED ROBOT trademark because they had been exclusively
associated with and owned by Plaintiffs.
126.
Mr. Culbert has devoted substantial time and expense to cultivating and
sustaining his relationships with his crowd-sourced explodingdog websites visitors and
fans. The confusion created by Defendants in regard to Mr. Culberts RED ROBOT
trademark has impaired Mr. Culberts relationship with those who interact with his website
and are consumers of his artwork, despite the loyalty of those fans and consumers to Mr.
Culbert and his strong brands and marks. The confusion created by Defendants in regard to
31
Mr. Culberts Red Robot designs and the RED ROBOT trademark has also impaired Mr.
Culberts ability to grow his brand and impairs his ability to seek his own licensing
relationships or to expand his market.
127.
Mr. Culbert has relied upon the invaluable goodwill behind Mr. Culberts
RED ROBOT trademark to attract visitors to his website and consumers of his artwork.
Defendants use of Mr. Culberts RED ROBOT trademark to advertise, market and
promote the unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet and goggles to consumers is causing
confusion among consumers as to the true source of the goods provided under the mark.
128.
The harm to Mr. Culbert and Explodingdog LLC is incalculable. As a result
of the invaluable goodwill Mr. Culbert has invested and acquired in the Red Robot designs
and the RED ROBOT trademark, Defendants activities are causing and will continue to
cause irreparable harm unless enjoined by this Court.
129.
Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law.
130.
In addition to his personal liability for choosing and wearing unauthorized
Robot Boogie helmets in competitions, at all times relevant, Ligety as a corporate officer
of Anomaly is also personally liable for Anomalys trademark infringement and unfair
competition. Ligety did more than merely control corporate affairs of Anomaly, but actually
personally took part in Anomalys tortuous and infringing activities and also specifically
directed employees to do so as well. Ligety was the moving, active conscious force behind
Anomalys action with regard to the RED ROBOT trademark.
131.
Also in addition to his personal liability for choosing and wearing
unauthorized Robot Boogie helmets in competitions, Ligety is personally liable under a

32
contributory infringement theory for having knowledge of the copyright infringing activity
through his direct participation and/or his activity which induces, causes or materially
contributes to the copyright infringing of Anomaly. Ligety is also personally liable under a the
vicarious liability theory of copyright infringement for Anomalys infringement because as a
corporate officer, (1) Ligety had the right and ability to supervise the infringing conduct, and (2)
Ligety had an obvious and direct financial interest in the infringing activity.
132.
Upon information and belief, Defendants have profited and continue to profit
from the unauthorized sale of the Robot Boogie helmets and goggles.
133.
Upon information and belief, Mr. Culbert and Explodingdog LLC have lost
profits or royalties they would have earned from explodingdog Red Robot merchandise but
for Defendants unauthorized copying, distribution, and sale of the merchandise with Red
Robot reproductions and derivatives.
COUNT I DIRECT COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
(17 U.S.C. 101 et seq.) (against all Defendants)
134.
Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations in each of the preceding
paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.

135.
The Red Robot as illustrated the explodingdog 2000, explodingdog 2001,
explodingdog 2002, explodingdog 2003, Sometime I Forget Youre A Robot, and

explodingdog 2012 are original works of authorship and constitute copyrightable subject
matter under the laws of the United States.
136.
Plaintiff duly complied with all laws pertinent to the Red Robot, registered the
Red Robot with the U.S. Copyright Office (VA 1-633-758, VAu 965-393, VA 1-635-885, VA
33
1-642-892, TX 7-852-372, and VAu 1-184-402), and is the beneficial owner of the rights in the
aforementioned works.
137.
At all times relevant to the Complaint, Plaintiffs are and have been solely and
exclusively authorized to, among other things, reproduce and distribute the Red Robot and any
merchandise containing the Red Robot Designs, including the products described herein.
138.
Plaintiff has not granted to Defendants any right or license to use the Designs in
any manner whatsoever.

139.
Defendants unauthorized copying, manufacture, reproduction and distribution of
helmets and goggles with the Plaintiffs Red Robot constitute infringement of Plaintiffs
exclusive rights of reproduction and public display in the copyrights in and to the Red Robot, all
in violation of Mr. Culberts exclusive rights of reproduction and public display under Sections
106(1), 106(5), and 501 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 106(1), 106(5) and 501.
140.
Defendant Ligetys unauthorized copying and use of helmets and goggles with the
Plaintiffs Red Robot in skiing competitions and to promote and market his business constitute
infringement of Plaintiffs exclusive rights of reproduction and public display in the copyrights
in and to the Red Robot, all in violation of Mr. Culberts exclusive rights of reproduction and
public display under Sections 106(1), 106(5), and 501 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C.
106(1), 106(5) and 501.
141.
Defendants copying of the Red Robot constitutes the creation of unauthorized
derivative works, and the creation thereof violates Mr. Culberts exclusive right to prepare
34
derivative works under Sections 106(2) and 501 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 106(2) and
501.
142.
Upon information and belief, Defendants infringement of Plaintiffs copyrights
in the Red Robot is deliberate, willful and in utter disregard of Plaintiffs rights.
143.
Defendants acts have caused, and will continue to cause, irreparable injury to
Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law and are thus entitled to an injunction along
with damages in an amount to be determined at trial.
144.
As a result of Defendants acts of infringement alleged herein, Plaintiffs have
sustained substantial injury, loss, and damage to his copyright interest in the Red Robot.
145.
Pursuant to Section 504(b) of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 504(b), Plaintiffs are
entitled to recover from Defendants the damages they have sustained and will sustain, and any
profits obtained by Defendants as a result of or attributable to the infringement. At present, the
amount of such damages and profits cannot be fully ascertained by Plaintiffs.
146.
Pursuant to Section 504(c) of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 504(c), Plaintiffs are
entitled to recover from Defendants statutory damages up to $150,000 per act of infringement.
147.
Pursuant to Section 505 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 505, Plaintiffs are
entitled to recover their costs of litigation, including attorneys fees.

COUNT II INDIRECT COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
(17 U.S.C. 101 et seq.)(against Ligety)
148.
35
149.
Ligety, as an individual, is significantly involved in the sale unauthorized Robot
Boogie products. Upon information and belief, Ligety made a decision to ski with the
unauthorized Robot Boogie helmet in the Olympics and other competitions with the full
knowledge and intention that Anomaly would offer for sale and sell unauthorized Robot
Boogie products.
150.
Ligety, as an officer of Anomaly, directly participated in, and/or induced, caused
or materially contributed to Anomalys infringing acts and sales.

151.
Ligety is not authorized to permit Anomaly or anyone else to distribute, sell, or
use the Red Robot Designs in any way.

152.
By the actions alleged above, Ligety has encouraged, assisted, induced, caused
and/or materially contributed to a large amount of copyright infringements of the Red Robot
Designs.
153.
Moreover, by the actions alleged above, Ligety has derived direct financial
benefit from the sale of unauthorized Robot Boogie products, and declined to exercise his right
and ability to supervise or control the infringing activity, despite his legal right to stop or limit
the directly infringing conduct as well as his practical ability to do so.
154.
Ligetys actions, as aforesaid, were done willfully and with deliberate disregard
for Mr. Culbert and Explodingdog LLCs rights.

155.
Accordingly, Ligety is indirectly liable for contributory and/or vicarious
infringement.
156.
Plaintiffs are entitled to recover from Ligety the damages, including attorneys
fees, they have sustained and will sustain, and any gains, profits and advantages obtained by
36
Ligety, and any such monetary amounts attributable to the aforementioned unauthorized sales by
Anomaly, as a result of Ligetys acts of contributory and/or vicarious infringement alleged
above, in an amount to be proven at trial.
COUNT III FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN
Section 43(a)(1)(A) of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. 1125(a)(1)(A))
157.

158.
Defendants have deliberately and willfully attempted to trade on Plaintiffs hard-
earned goodwill in his RED ROBOT mark and the reputation established by Plaintiffs in
connection with his good and service in order to confuse customers as to the origin and
sponsorship of Defendants goods and to pass off their goods in commerce as those of Plaintiffs.
159.
Defendants unauthorized and tortious conduct has also deprived and will
continue to deprive Plaintiffs of the ability to control consumer perception of his goods and
services offered under the RED ROBOT marks, placing the reputation and goodwill of Plaintiffs
and his valuable mark in the hands of Defendants.
160.
Defendants conduct is likely to cause, and has caused, confusion, mistake or
deception as to the affiliation, connection or association of Defendants and their goods with
Plaintiffs, and as to the origin, sponsorship or approval of Defendants and their good, in violation
of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a)(l).
161.
Defendants had direct and full knowledge of Plaintiffs prior use of and rights in
the RED ROBOT mark before the acts complained of herein. The knowing, intentional and
37
willful nature of the acts set forth herein renders this an exceptional case under 15 U.S.C.
1117(a).
162.
As a result of Defendants aforesaid conduct, Plaintiffs have suffered commercial
damage, as well as the continuing loss of goodwill and reputation established by Plaintiffs in its
RED ROBOT mark. This continuing loss of goodwill cannot be properly calculated and thus
constitutes irreparable harm and injury for which Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law.
163.
Plaintiffs will continue to suffer irreparable harm unless this Court enjoins
Defendants conduct.
COUNT IV COMMON LAW TRADEMARK INFRINGMENT AND
UNFAIR COMPETITION
164.

165.
Plaintiffs built up valuable goodwill in RED ROBOT mark, and the public has
come to associate the mark with Plaintiffs.

166.
Defendants have unlawfully used Plaintiffs RED ROBOT mark, and such use
constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition in violation of the common law of
Connecticut.
167.
Defendants activities are designed with the intent to mislead and/or deceive the
trade and public into believing that Defendants goods are affiliated with, authorized, endorsed,
sponsored and/or sanctioned by Plaintiffs or are connected or associated in some way with
Plaintiffs, which they are not. Such acts have caused and continue to cause confusion as to the
source and/or sponsorship of Defendants infringing goods.
38
168.
Defendants have engaged and continue to engage in this activity knowingly and
willfully.
169.
Defendants acts of common law trademark infringement, unless enjoined by this
Court, will continue to cause Plaintiffs to sustain irreparable damage, loss and injury for which
Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law.
170.
By reason of the acts and conduct of Defendant complained of herein, Plaintiffs
have suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable injury including substantial damage to its
business in the form of diversion of trade, loss of profits, loss of goodwill and damage to its
reputation.
171.
By reason of their acts or unfair competition, Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs
for the actual damages incurred by Plaintiffs as a result of Defendants acts and any additional
profits of the Defendants attributable to the infringement, together with costs and attorneys fees.
COUNT V CONNECTICUT UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES ACT
Connecticut General Statutes 42-110a, et seq.
172.

173.
At all times material hereto, Defendants constitute persons within the meaning
of Connecticut General Statutes 42-110a(3).

174.
The conduct of the Defendants, as alleged herein, is illegal, unscrupulous and
immoral and is in violation of the public policy of the State of Connecticut.
39
175.
Defendants conduct, as aforesaid, was undertaken in wanton, willful or reckless
disregard of the law, standards of business morality and public policy, and with intent to injury
Plaintiffs.
176.
Defendants unfair and deceptive conduct caused substantial financial injury to
Plaintiffs as a result of wrongfully associating themselves with Plaintiffs for their commercial
benefit.
177.
Defendants engaged and continue to engage in trade and commerce within the
State of Connecticut, as defined in Connecticut General Statutes 42-110a(4).

178.
As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants conduct, Plaintiffs have sustained
an ascertainable loss of money.

179.
Defendants conduct violates the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act
(CUTPA), Connecticut General Statutes 42-110a, et seq.

180.
Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes 42-
110a for its losses and other damages recoverable pursuant to CUTPA and are subject to
equitable orders enjoining Defendants from continuing to utilize Plaintiffs name for any
purpose.
COUNT VI CONNECTICUT UNFAIR SALES PRACTICES ACT
Connecticut General Statutes 42-115e, et seq.
181.
40
182.
By virtue of the Defendants widespread promotional use of Plaintiffs Red Robot
Designs and the RED ROBOT trademark on goods and in catalogs for those goods constitute
deceptive acts.
183.
Defendants have made false and misleading representations in commercial
advertising that misrepresent the nature, characteristics, and origin of its goods, services and
commercial activities in commerce in violation of the Connecticut Unfair Sales Practices Act
(Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-115e, et seq.).
184.
Defendants have made representations, omissions or other practices likely to
mislead consumers. As a result, consumers will reasonably be deceived under the circumstances
by Defendants activities. As another result, consumers decisions or conduct have likely been
affected.
185.
Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes 42-
115e for its losses and other damages recoverable pursuant to CUSPA and are subject to
equitable orders enjoining Defendants from continuing to utilize Plaintiffs designs and
trademark for any purpose.
186.
Defendants deceptive acts were engaged in willfully, and are subject to an order
by the Court awarding Plaintiffs their attorneys fees and costs.

COUNT VII UNJUST ENRICHMENT
187.

188.
As a result of the conduct described above, Defendants have been and will be
unjustly enriched at the expense of Plaintiffs. Among other things, Defendants unfair and
illegal actions as described above have enabled Defendants to generate business and sell goods to
41
customers who, in the absence of Defendants unfair and illegal actions as described above,
would have purchased goods authorized by Plaintiffs.
189.
It would be unjust for Defendants to be permitted to retain the ill-gotten gains
wrongfully earned at Plaintiffs expense.

190.
Plaintiffs are entitled to be compensated for Defendants unjust enrichment in an
amount to be determined at trial.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully demands:
A.
That the Court find that Defendants directly and/or indirectly infringed
Plaintiffs copyrights in the Red Robot, and engaged in false designation of origin, unfair
competition, and unfair trade practices relating thereto;
B.
A permanent injunction providing that, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 502 and 15
U.S.C. 1116(a), Defendants, their owners, partners, officers, directors, agents, servants,
employees, representatives, licensees, subsidiaries, manufacturers and distributors, jointly
and severally, be enjoined throughout the world during the pendency of this action and
permanently thereafter from:
a) That the Court enter a permanent injunction restraining and enjoining Defendants, their
employees, agents, officers, directors, successors, subsidiaries, and assigns, and all those
in active concert with them from
i. imitating, copying, using, reproducing, displaying, and/or preparing
derivative works based upon the Red Robot, or otherwise infringing
Mr. Culberts copyrights in any manner, medium, or form;
42
ii. manufacturing, reproducing, selling, offering for sale, promoting,

advertising, distributing, and/or commercially exploiting in any
manner, either directly or indirectly, any product which incorporates
the Red Robot; and
iii. using any false description, representation, or designation, or otherwise
engaging in conduct that is likely to create an erroneous impression that
Defendants products are endorsed by Plaintiffs or are connected in any
way with Plaintiffs; and
iv. holding themselves out as licensees or otherwise authorized users of
Plaintiffs Red Robot.
C.
For an order requiring an accounting, and that all gains, profits and
advantages derived by Defendants by their direct and/or indirect acts of infringement be

deemed held in constructive trust for the benefit of Plaintiffs.
D.
That, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 503 and 15 U.S.C. 1118, Defendants be
required to deliver to the Court, or to some other person that the Court may designate, for
ultimate destruction, any and all articles of merchandise, including all helmets and goggles
and /or other materials in Defendants possession or control which might, if sold or
distributed for sale, violate the injunction granted herein;
E.
For Defendants direct and/or indirect acts of copyright infringement, that
Plaintiffs be entitled to recover all damages suffered by Plaintiffs as a result of Defendants

infringing acts and all profits derived from Defendants wrongful acts in an amount to be
determined at the trial of this action, as provided by 17 U.S.C. 504(b);
43
F.
That, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117, Plaintiffs be awarded such damages
available under the Lanham Act, including but not limited to, actual damages,
Defendants profits, treble damages, costs of suit and attorneys fees;
G.
That Plaintiffs be awarded punitive damages and attorneys fees pursuant to
Connecticut General Statutes 42-110g(d); and

H.
Such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.
Date:
October 27, 2015

Forest Hills, NY
Respectfully Submitted,
GABRIEL & PELAEZ, PLLC
By:_ s/Michael G. Gabriel
Michael G. Gabriel, Esq.
Michael G. Gabriel (ct22974)
GABRIEL & PELAEZ, PLLC
72-11 Austin St.
PMB No. 406
Forest Hills, NY 11375
p. (917) 515-3970
f. (917) 515-3970
Email: [email protected]
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS
44

Culbert and ExplodingDog - Red Robot Complaint PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Culbert and ExplodingDog - Red Robot Complaint PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Culbert and ExplodingDog - Red Robot Complaint PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 1 of 44

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Civ Case No.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT, TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT,

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 2 of 44

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 3 of 44

Plaintiff Adam Culbert is an individual residing at 7 Cobbs Road, West Hartford,

Plaintiff Explodingdog, LLC is a Connecticut limited liability corporation with its

principal place of business at 7 Cobbs Road, West Hartford, CT, 06107.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Theodore S. Ligety (Ligety) is an

individual residing in Park City, Utah.

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 4 of 44

The explodingdog.com website is a crowd-sourced comic blog that works under

2000 at <www.explodingdog.com> and on his Tumblr page since 2008 at

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 5 of 44

pseudonym which are based in part on the art of his website:

Wish For Something Better (2001, Explodingdog LLC, ASIN B002WZRKNQ);

illustrations from his explodingdog body of work.

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 6 of 44

Mr. Culbert obtained copyright registrations in his explodingdog.com artwork for

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 7 of 44

Mr. Culbert first introduced the Red Robot to explodingdog as an on-going

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 8 of 44

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 9 of 44

the world was part of explodingdog 2002.

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 10 of 44

registered copyrighted collections of explodingdog 2000, explodingdog 2001,

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 11 of 44

This link to the internet archive at archive.org is of the explodingdog.com store in

2001 selling Red Robot shirts:

At Exhibit H is an example of explodingdog merchandise where the robot city

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 12 of 44

As one of the most prominent characters of explodingdog, the Red Robot

appeared in each of Mr. Culberts books published after 2001.

Copyright Registration No. TX 7-852-372 with a registration date of February 7, 2014. A

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 13 of 44

The RED ROBOT Trademark

The popularity of the character created a strong association between Red

The RED ROBOT trademark is shown below:

The RED ROBOT trademark is also shown below, as it is consistently used

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 14 of 44

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 15 of 44

As a result of his success as a skier, Ligety has received valuable endorsements

On information and belief, Defendant Ligety is the President of Defendant

Upon information and belief, Anomaly USA is a subsidiary of Anomaly Srl.

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 16 of 44

Upon information and belief, Anomaly maintains a website to advertise, sell,

and offer for sale its Shred products at <www.shredoptics.com>.

Upon information and belief, additionally, Anomaly also utilizes a

Upon information and belief, it is part of Anomaly's business model to have

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 17 of 44

Upon information and belief, on or around January 2014, Federico Merle,

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 18 of 44

performance was televised on NBC, according to a report by Business Insider, the

At the Sochi Olympics, Ligety wore a helmet that featured a reproduction or

derivative of Mr. Culberts Red Robot without Plaintiffs knowledge or permission.

Case 3:15-cv-01563-AVC Document 1 Filed 10/27/15 Page 19 of 44

of his Red Robot.