Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §§ 106,115. and 501.
74. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' vicarious infringement ofplaintiffs
copyrights and exclusive rights under copyright, plaintiffs are entitled to damages and Defendants'
profits pursuant to 17 USC § 504(b) for each infringement.
75. Alternatively, plaintiff is enitled to the maximum statutory damages in the amount of
$100,000 with respect to each work infringed, or for such other amounts as may be proper under 17
USC § 504( c ). Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that such statutory
damages shall exceed $10,000,000.
76. Plaintiff is further entitled to attorneys' fees and full costs pursuant to 17 USC. § 505.
77. Defendants' conduct, as hereinabove averred, is causing and, unless enjoined and restraine,
by this Court, will continue to cause plaintiff great and irreparable injury that cannot fully be
compensated or measured in money. Plaintiffhas no adequate remedy at law. Pursuant to 17 U S.C.
§ 502. plaintiff is entitled to a preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting further vicarious
infringements of plaintiff s copyrights.
FORTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
VIOLATIONS OF CALIFQRNI~ £lylL CODE SECTION 980
[ Against All Defendants ]
78. Plaintiff re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 77 inclusive
and incorporates them herein by this reference.
79. Plaintiffs possess exclusive ownership interests in and to the Pre-1972 Recordings pursuar
to California Civil Code section 980(a)(2) and under the common law. Through their conduct as
alleged herein, Defendants have violated plaintiff s exclusive ownership interests in and to the Pre-
1972 Recordings.
80. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' conduct in violation of plaintiffs exclusiv,
)wnership interests in and to the Pre-1972 Recordings, Defendants have received investments and
)roceeds and plaintiff has been damaged in an amount that shall be proved at trial.

81. Through its conduct averred herein, Defendants are guilty of oppression, fraud, and/or
malice and plaintiff, in addition to its actual damages are, by reason thereof, is entitled to recover
exemplary and punitive damages against Defendants.
82. Defendants' conduct as alleged herein is causing and, unless enjoined and restrained by-th
Court, will continue to cause plaintiff great and irreparable injury that cannot fully be compensated (
measured in money. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law. Plaintiff is entitled to a preliminary aI
permanent injunction prohibiting further violation of plaintiff s rights in the Pre-1972 Recordings.
FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT
(15 U.S.C. && 1051 et sea.)
[ Against All Defendants ]
83. Plaintiffre-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 82 inclusivj
and incorporates them herein by this reference.
84. Continuously since November II, 1966 plaintiff has used the trademark "It's A Beautiful
~" and artwork to identify its music and to distinguish such music from any musical works
produced and sold by others by, among other things, prominently displaying these trademarks on th~
goods. The fictitious name "It's A Beautiful Day" was issued by The United States Patent and
Trademark Office as Reg. No. 1,570,310. Plaintiff has prominently displayed these marks on
letterheads, advertising, and in periodicals distributed throughout the world. Plaintiff has established
prior art and has common-law rights in said trademarks.
85. Plaintiff alleges that defendant napster users have used plaintiffs "It's a Beautiful Day"
mark without permission to identify unauthorized copies of Plaintiff s goods. These acts amount to
trademark infringement and unfair competition and have been committed with the intent to cause
confusion, mistake and to deceive.
86. Defendants FRED DURST and ROGER MCGUINN substantially contribute to the
international unauthorized use of plaintiffs mark by encouraging, speaking positively, and by

participating in free concerts promoting Defendant NAPSTER, INC.
87. Defendants HANK BARRY, HUMMER WINBLAD, BOB BOZEMAN, YOSI AMRAl\I
and JOE KRAUS substantially contribute to the international unauthorized use of plaintiff's mark b:
investing substantial sums of money, supporting, guiding, encouraging, and promoting Defendant
NAPSTER, INC for their own future benefit.
88. These defendants have caused unauthorized versions of Plaintiffs products to enter into
Interstate Commerce with the designation and representation of the "It's a Beautiful Day" mark.
Such use of this name is a false designation of origin which is likely to cause confusion, to cause
mistake, and to deceive as to the affiliation, connection or association of defendants with plaintiff as
to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of such products by plaintiff. These acts are in violation of 1
U.S.C. § 1 l25(a), in that defendants have used in connection with goods and services a false
designation of origin, a false or misleading description and representation of fact which is likely to
cause confusion, and cause mistake, and to deceive as to.the affiliation, connection or association of
defendants with plaintiff and as to the origin, sponsorship, and approval of defendants' goods,
services and commercial activities by plaintiff.
89. By reason of these defendants' acts alleged herein, plaintiff has and will suffer damage to
its business, reputation and goodwill and the loss of sales and profits which it would have made but
for these defendants' acts.
90. These defendants threaten to continue to do the acts complained of herein and, unless
restrained and enjoined, will continue to do so, all to plaintiffs irreparable damage. It would be
difficult to ascertain the amount of compensation which could afford plaintiff adequate relief for suc
continuing acts, and a multiplicity of judicial proceedings would be required. Plaintiff s remedy at
law is not adequate to compensate it for injuries threatened.

SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT
(15 U.S.C. && 1051 et sea.)
[ Against All Defendants]
91. Plaintiff re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 90 inclusivc
and incorporates them herein by this reference.
92. Continuously since September 9, 1966 plaintiff has used the trademark "Moby Grape" and
artwork to identify its music and to distinguish such music from musical works produced and sold bJ
others by, among other things, prominently displaying these trademarks on the goods. The fictitious
name "Moby Grape" was issued by The United States Patent and Trademark Office as Reg. No.
1,886,382. Plaintiff has prominently displayed these marks on letterheads, advertising, and in
periodicals distributed throughout the world. Plaintiff has established prior art and has comrnon-law
rights in said trademarks.
93. Plaintiff alleges that defendant Jonathan H. Greene has used plaintiffs "Moby Grape"
mark without permission to identify unauthorized copies of Plaintiff s goods. These acts amount to
trademark infringement and unfair competition and have been committed with the intent to cause
confusion, mistake and to deceive.
94. Defendants FRED DURST and ROGER MCGUINN substantially contribute to the
international unauthorized use of plaintiff s mark by encouraging, speaking positively, and by
participating in free concerts promoting Defendant NAPSTER, INC.
95. Defendants HANK BARRY, HUMMER WINBLAD, BOB BOZEMAN, YOSI AMRAM,
and JOE KRAUS substantially contribute to the international unauthorized use of plaintiffs mark by
investing substantial sums of money, supporting, guiding, encouraging, and promoting Defendant
NAPSTER, INC for their own future benefit.
96. These defendants have caused their products to enter into Interstate Commerce with the
designation and representation of the "Moby Grape" mark connected therewith. Such use of this
name is a false designation of origin which is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, and to
deceive as to the affiliation, connection or association of these defendants with plaintiff as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of such products by plaintiff. These acts are in violation of 15
U.S.C. § 1125(a), in that these defendants have used in connection with goods and services a false
designation of origin, a false or misleading description and representation of fact which is likely to
cause confusion, and cause mistake, and to deceive as to the affiliation, connection or association (]
these defendants with plaintiff and as to the origin, sponsorship, and approval of defendants' good5
services and commercial activities by plaintiff.
97. By reason of these defendants' acts alleged herein, plaintiff has and will suffer damage t
its business, reputation and goodwill and the loss of sales and profits which it would have made bu
for these defendants' acts.
98. These defendants threaten to continue to do the acts complained ofherein and, unless
restrained and enjoined, will continue to do so, all to plaintiffs irreparable damage. It would be
difficult to ascertain the amount of compensation which could afford plaintiff adequate relief for such
continuing acts, and a multiplicity of judicial proceedings would be required. Plaintiff s remedy at
law is not adequate to compensate it for injuries threatened.
SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
UNFAIR COMPETITION
(15 U .S.C. §§ 1125 et seo. )
(California Business and Professions Code.& 17200)
[Against All Defendants]
99. Plaintiff re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs I through 98 inclusi'
and incorporates them herein by this reference.
loo. The foregoing acts and conduct of Defendants constitutes an appropriation and invasior
of the property rights of plaintiff, and constitute unfair competition under California Business &
Professions Code section 17200 and under the common law.
101. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's conduct, as alleged herein, plaintiff is
further entitled to recover all proceeds and other compensation received or to be received by Napste
arising from its users' infringements of Plaintiffs music. Plaintiff requests the Court to order

Defendants to render an accounting to ascertain the amount of such profits and compensation.
102. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants's unfair competition, plaintiff has been
damaged, and Defendants have been unjustly enriched, in an amount that shall be proved at trial for
which damages and restitution and disgorgement is appropriate. Such damages and restitution and
disgorgement should include a declaration by this Court that Napster is a constructive trustee for the
benefit of plaintiff and an order that Napster convey to plaintiffs all the gross receipts and investmen1
received or to be received that are attributable to infringement of Plaintiff s music.
103. Through its conduct alleged herein, Defendants are guilty of oppression, fraud, and
malice and plaintiff is, in addition to their actual damages, by reason thereof, entitled to recover
exemplary and punitive damages against Defendants.
104. Defendant's conduct, as hereinabove averred, is causing and, unless enjoined and
restrained by this Court, will continue to cause plaintiff great and irreparable injury that cannot fully
be compensated or measured in money. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law. Pursuant to
Califbmia Business & Professions Code section 17203 plaintiff is entitled to a preliminary and
permanent injunction prohibiting further acts of unfair competition.
EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
INTERFERENCE WITH ECONOMIC RELATIONS
(CC §§ 329~2 33~3. 3422:CCP §6 526. 527(A))
[Against All Defendants ]
105. Plaintiffre-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs I through 104
inclusive, and incorporates them herein by this reference.
106. Plaintiff alleges that an economic relationship exists between San Francisco Sound and it~
distributors and consumers. Between 1968 and the present, plaintiff customarily provided sound
recordings to various retailers and distributors including, but not limited to Valley Media, Bayside,
and MSI of Miami. Plaintiff has agreed to supply the above entities with its sound recordings as
needed.
107. Defendants knew of the above described relationships.

108. Despite such known relationships, Defendants continue to distribute copies of Plaintiff
music with the intent to harm plaintiff financially and to induce the above mentioned third parties ti
sever their business relationship with plaintiff.
109. In May of2000, Valler Media ended its relationship with Plaintiff as a result of
Defendants' conduct. Additionally, prospective business relations with other distributors never
occurred due to Defendants. conduct.
110. As a proximate result of Defendants' conduct and the severance of business relations b)
Valley Media, Plaintiff has suffered damages in a sum to be proven at trial.
111. The aforementioned acts of Defendants, and each of them, were willful and oppressive.
Plaintiff is therefore entitled to punitive damages in the amount of $10,000,000.
112. These Defendants threaten to continue to disrupt the business relations of the Plaintiff,
and unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to do so, all to plaintiffs great and irreparable injt
for which damages would not afford adequate relief, in that they would not completely compensate
for the injury to Plaintiff s business reputation and goodwill.
PRA YER FOR RELIEF
(CLAIMS FOR COPYRIGHTINFmNGEMENT)
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against the defendants and each of them as follows:
1. That defendants be held to have infringed plaintiff s copyrights in the Subject Musical
Compositions and each of them.
2. That the Court find a substantial likelihood that defendants have and will continue to
infringe plaintiffs copyrights in the Subject Musical Compositions, or either of them, unless enjoiru
from doing so.
3. That defendants, the corporate directors and officers. and defendants. agents, servants,
employees, attorneys, and all other persons in active concert or privity or in participation with them,
be enjoined from directly or indirectly infringing plaintiffs copyrights in the Subject Musical
Compositions, or either of them, or continuing to market, offer, sell, dispose of, license, lease,
transfer, display, advertise, reproduce, develop or manufacture any works derived or copied from tht
Subject Musical Compositions, or either of them, or to participate or assist in any such activity.
4. That defendants, the corporate directors and officers, and defendants' agents, servants,
employees, attorneys and all other persons in active concert or privity or in participation with them,
be enjoined to return to plaintiff any and all masters, originals, copies, facsimiles or duplicates of the
Subject Musical Compositions, or either of them, in their possession, custody or control.
5. That defendants, the corporate directors and officers, and defendants' agents, servants,
employees, attorneys, and all other persons in active concert or privity or in participation with them,
be enjoined to recall from all customers any originals, copies, facsimiles, or duplicates of any works
shown by the evidence to infringe any copyright in the Subject Musical Compositions, or either of
them.
6. That judgment be entered for plaintiff and against defendants for plaintiff s actual damages
according to proof, and for additional profits attributable to infringements of plaintiffs copyrights, ir
accordance with proof.
7. That judgment be entered for plaintiff and against defendants for statutory damages base4-
upon defendants' acts of infringement, pursuant to the Copyright Act of 1976 and 17 U.S.C. §§ 101-
et seq. and for all damages available under California Civil Code Section 980.
8. That defendants be required to supply to plaintiff an accounting of all gains, profits and
advantages derived from their acts of infringement and that all gains, profits and advantages derived
by defendants from their acts of infringement or other violations of law be deemed to be held in
constructive trust for the benefit of plaintiff.
9. That Defendants be held to have damaged Plaintiff s reputation in the music industry and
that Plaintiff recover for emotional distress and that plaintiff be awarded binding arbitration before ar
arbitrator having expertise in the recording industry .
10. That plaintiff have judgment against defendants for plaintiffs costs and attorney's fees.
11. F or a jury trial and that the Court grant such other, further and different relief as the Court
~
deems proper under the circumstances.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
(TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND UNFAIR COMPETITION
WHEREFORE. Plaintiff prays for judgment against the defendants and each of them as follows:
1. That defendants be held to have infringed plaintiff s trademark rights and to have committe
unfair competition against plaintiff.
2. That defendants, the corporate directors and officers, and defendants' agents, servants,
employees, attorneys, and all other persons in active concert or privity or in participation with them,
be enjoined from (1) directly or indirectly using the "It's a Beautiful Day" and "Mobv Grape"
trademarks which is likely to cause confusion and (2) continuing any and all acts of unfair competiti<
as herein alleged.
3. That defendants be required to account to plaintiff for any and all profits derived by
defendants from the sale of its goods and for all damages sustained by plaintiff by reason of said acts
of infringement and unfair competition complained of herein.
4. That the Court award enhanced damages against defendants and in favor of plaintiff in the
sum of$IO,OOO,OOO by reason of defendants' fraud and palming off.
5. That costs of this action be awarded to plaintiff.
6. That the Court find this to be an exceptional case and that plaintiff be awarded reasonable
attorney's fees.
7. For a jury trial and that the Court grant such other, further and different relief. including but
not limited to, treble damages, as the Court deems proper under the circumstances.
PRA YER FOR RELIEF
(INTERFERENCE WITH ECONOMIC RELATIONS)
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against the defendants and each of them as follows:
I. For damages according to proof.


deems proper under the circumstances.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
(TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND UNFAIR COMPETITION
WHEREFORE. Plaintiff prays for judgment against the defendants and each of them as follows:
1. That defendants be held to have infringed plaintiff s trademark rights and to have committe
unfair competition against plaintiff.
2. That defendants, the corporate directors and officers, and defendants' agents, servants,
employees, attorneys, and all other persons in active concert or privity or in participation with them,
be enjoined from (1) directly or indirectly using the "It's a Beautiful Day" and "Mobv Grape"
trademarks which is likely to cause confusion and (2) continuing any and all acts of unfair competiti<
as herein alleged.
3. That defendants be required to account to plaintiff for any and all profits derived by
defendants from the sale of its goods and for all damages sustained by plaintiff by reason of said acts
of infringement and unfair competition complained of herein.
4. That the Court award enhanced damages against defendants and in favor of plaintiff in the
sum of$IO,OOO,OOO by reason of defendants' fraud and palming off.
5. That costs of this action be awarded to plaintiff.
6. That the Court find this to be an exceptional case and that plaintiff be awarded reasonable
attorney's fees.
7. For a jury trial and that the Court grant such other, further and different relief. including but
not limited to, treble damages, as the Court deems proper under the circumstances.
PRA YER FOR RELIEF
(INTERFERENCE WITH ECONOMIC RELATIONS)
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against the defendants and each of them as follows:
I. For damages according to proof.