IP Law Daily, COPYRIGHT—S.D. Fla.: Copyright owners’ motion for summary judgment was granted since infringement was established, (Aug 20, 2026)

By Carolin Dennis, B.Sc., LL.B., LL.M.

A media company’s founder and Chief Executive Officer was liable for copyright infringement for exploiting certain sound recordings and musical compositions without the plaintiffs’ authorization.

The federal district court in Miami, Florida, granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment against the founder and Chief Executive Officer of Harley Boys Entertainment, LLC d/b/a Road Runner Entertainment, Inc., and the Chief Executive Officer of HBE Media Holdings, Inc. The district court found that the plaintiffs’ established their claims for direct, contributory, and vicarious copyright infringement (J&N Records LLC v. Harley Boys Entertainment, LLC, No. 1:24-cv-20172-DPG (S.D. Fla. Aug. 16, 2026)).

Background. J&N Records LLC (J&N Records) and 829Music Mundial LLC (829Music) are record companies that produce, distribute, sell, license, and facilitate the distribution of sound recordings. J&N Publishing LLC (J&N Publishing) and Mayimba Music, Inc. (Mayimba) are music publishers. Together, J&N Records LLC (J&N Records), J&N Publishing LLC (J&N Publishing), 829Music Mundial LLC (829Music), and Mayimba Music, Inc. (Mayimba) (collectively, plaintiffs) own or hold the exclusive rights to distribute and administer dozens of sound recordings and musical compositions (Copyrighted Works). In addition, 829Music controls certain works by Linar De Jesus Espinal Nunez (El Chaval Works), and J&N Publishing controls certain works by Chico Severino (Severino Works) (collectively, Additional Copyrighted Works). The plaintiffs are the exclusive holders of certificates of registration from the U.S. Copyright Office for the Copyrighted Works and Additional Copyrighted Works. Harley Boys Entertainment, LLC d/b/a Road Runner Entertainment, Inc. (Harley Boys), HBE Media Holdings, Inc. (HBE) (together, Harley Defendants) and Luis Alfredo Silverio a/k/a Luigui Bleand (Silverio) (collectively, defendants) did not obtain the plaintiffs’ permission to exploit, reproduce, distribute, or otherwise use the Copyrighted Works or Additional Copyrighted Works. They had no agreements with the plaintiffs or with the relevant artists or songwriters authorizing such use; no express or implied license; and no license from the plaintiffs to distribute the works.

On July 14, 2021, Harley Boys entered into a distribution agreement (Distribution Agreement) with Warner Music Latina Inc. and/or ADA Latin (Warner Music). Silverio, the founder and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Harley Boys and the CEO of HBE negotiated the Distribution Agreement on Harley Boys’ behalf. In connection with that agreement, Harley Boys provided Warner Music, and Warner Music Group Corp. d/b/a ADA Latin (together, Warner) a catalogue for distribution that included Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works. Relying on Silverio’s representations concerning Harely Boys’ rights in the catalogue, Warner distributed the plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works to various digital platforms, including Spotify, Qobuz, Amazon, and YouTube. Warner later terminated the Distribution Agreement after learning that Harely Boys had no rights in the Copyrighted Works.

Silverio’s unauthorized distribution of the plaintiffs’ works continued after the Warner Music distribution. On January 22, 2023, Silverio caused several sound recordings owned or controlled by 829 Music to be posted on YouTube without authorization. Silverio and HBE also provided the Copyrighted Works and the Additional Copyrighted Works to Ditto Music Ltd. (Ditto), even though they had neither authorization nor licenses to do so. It is undisputed that the defendants knew of the plaintiffs’ ownership of the Copyrighted Works and Additional Copyrighted Works when the defendants began exploiting them, and that the defendants in fact exploited those works.

The plaintiffs filed an action against Warner, Harley Boys, and Silverio and filed an Amended Complaint against the Harley Defendants and Silverio asserting claims for direct copyright infringement (Count I), contributory copyright infringement (Count II), and vicarious copyright infringement (Count III). The plaintiffs also sought (1) statutory damages for 40 of the Copyrighted Works and Additional Copyrighted Works that Silverio and Harley Boys infringed and (2) injunctive relief.

On July 31, 2025, after the parties reached a settlement, the district court administratively closed the case and denied all pending motions as moot. However, the settlement fell apart, and, on September 10, 2025, the plaintiffs moved to reopen the case and renew their Motions for Summary Judgment and for Default Judgment. The district court reopened the case and before the court is the plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment against Silverio.

Direct copyright infringement. The plaintiffs established the ownership element because the undisputed facts showed that the plaintiffs own or hold the exclusive distribution and administration rights to the Copyrighted Works and Additional Copyrighted Works and that the works are registered with the United States Copyright Office. The plaintiffs also established that Silverio personally participated in the unauthorized exploitation of those works. Silverio negotiated the Distribution Agreement for Harley Boys and caused Harley Boys to provide Warner with a catalogue that included the plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works. He represented that Harley Boys had authority to distribute that catalogue. Warner relied on this representation in distributing the works to digital platforms, including Spotify, Qobuz, Amazon, and YouTube. Silverio also, without authorization, caused sound recordings owned or controlled by 829Music to be posted to YouTube on January 22, 2023, and he and HBE provided the Copyrighted Works and Additional Copyrighted Works to Ditto for distribution. This was sufficient to establish direct infringement by Silverio.

The record further established that Silverio had no express or implied license to exploit the Copyrighted Works or Additional Copyrighted Works; did not obtain the plaintiffs’ permission to do so; and knew of the plaintiffs’ ownership interests when the defendants began exploiting the works. Thus, the distributions and postings were unauthorized. Lastly, Silverio’s infringement was wilful because he knew of the plaintiffs’ asserted ownership rights yet continued to cause the works to be exploited without a license. Accordingly, the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment as a matter of law against Silverio on Count I.

Contributory copyright infringement. The district court noted that to establish their claim for contributory copyright infringement, the plaintiffs must show direct infringement; that the defendant had knowledge of the direct infringement; and that the defendant intentionally induced, encouraged, or materially contributed to the direct infringement. The district court found that the undisputed record established each element as to the direct infringement committed by Warner and Ditto. Next, Silverio knew that Warner’s and Ditto’s distributions were unauthorized. Lastly, Silverio intentionally induced, encouraged, and materially contributed to the distributors’ infringement. Accordingly, there were no genuine disputes of material fact, and the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment as a matter of law against Silverio on Count II.

Vicarious copyright infringement. The district court found that Silverio had both the authority and practical ability to prevent the infringement by withholding the works, correcting the asserted rights, terminating or modifying the authorization to distribute, or directing the Harley Defendants not to furnish the works to Warner and Ditto. Instead, he caused the works to be supplied for distribution despite knowing that no license existed. The record also established that Silverio had a direct financial interest in the infringing activity. The Distribution Agreement was an agreement between Harley Boys and Warner under which Warner distributed the Harley Boys catalogue, including the plaintiffs’ works. Silverio, as Harley Boys’ founder and CEO, negotiated that agreement and stood to benefit from the exploitation of the catalogue through the enterprise he controlled. His financial interest was therefore not incidental: it arose directly from the unauthorized distribution he arranged and had authority to stop. The same conclusion followed from his role in causing HBE and Ditto to exploit the Additional Copyrighted Works. Therefore, the plaintiffs established both elements of vicarious liability, and there was no genuine dispute of material fact. Accordingly, the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment as a matter of law against Silverio on Count III.

Attorney’s fees and damages. As Silverio willfully infringed on the plaintiffs’ copyrights the district court found that the plaintiffs were entitled to attorney’s fees and costs. The district court also noted that instead of proving actual injury, a plaintiff in a copyright infringement action may choose to recover statutory damages “in a sum of not less than $750 or more than $30,000 as the court considers just” for each infringed work. 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)(1). Here, the plaintiffs elected statutory damages for 40 infringed on works.

Accordingly, the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment against Silverio was granted.

The Case is No. 1:24-cv-20172-DPG.

Judge: Gayles, D.

Attorneys: Sarah Anne Gottlieb (Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP) for J&N Records LLC, J&N Publishing LLC, 829Music Mundial LLC and Mayimba Music, Inc.

Companies: J&N Records LLC; J&N Publishing LLC; 829Music Mundial LLC; Mayimba Music, Inc.; Harley Boys Entertainment, LLC d/b/a Road Runner Entertainment Inc.; HBE Media Holdings Inc.

Cases: Copyright FloridaNews