IP Law Daily, COPYRIGHT—W.D. Wash.: Image licensor’s copyright infringement claims against Expedia dismissed with leave to amend, (May 1, 2026)

By Mandavi Singh, LL.M.

The complaint failed to plead specific facts showing Expedia’s active, volitional role in selecting, uploading, or using the asserted copyrighted images.

A federal district court in Seattle, Washington, has dismissed a copyright infringement action brought by an automotive image licensor against Expedia and its subsidiary, holding that the complaint failed to plausibly allege “volitional conduct,” a necessary element of direct infringement. The court found that the plaintiff’s allegations did not demonstrate that the defendants actively selected, controlled, or caused the use of the copyrighted images, but granted leave to amend to allow the plaintiff to cure those deficiencies (Evox Productions LLC v. Expedia, Inc., No. 2:25-cv-02602-JLR (W.D. Wash. Apr. 28, 2026)).

Background. The plaintiff, EVOX Productions LLC, is a California-based company that licenses images of vehicles for commercial use. The defendant, Expedia, Inc., operates a global online travel platform, and Hotwire, Inc., a wholly owned business unit of Expedia, provides travel booking services through its own website. EVOX alleged that both entities used its copyrighted images without authorization in connection with their online services.

EVOX asserted copyrights in more than one million automotive images, each individually registered under the U.S. Copyright Act. The dispute concerned 204 specific images allegedly used without authorization. These images were allegedly displayed in three ways: through Google search results linking to Expedia’s services, as navigation icons on the Hotwire website (27 images), and as navigation icons on the Expedia website (4 images).

According to the complaint, EVOX discovered the alleged infringement in 2022 and notified Expedia, providing URLs to identify the infringing uses. Despite this, the alleged unauthorized use continued until at least mid-2024. EVOX filed suit in December 2025, asserting direct copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 501 and seeking damages, interest, and attorneys’ fees. In response, Expedia and Hotwire moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim, or alternatively sought a more definite statement.

Pleading standard. The court applied the familiar Rule 12(b)(6) standard, requiring a complaint to contain sufficient factual matter to state a plausible claim for relief. Relying on Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), and Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), the court reiterated that conclusory allegations are insufficient and that plaintiffs must plead facts permitting a reasonable inference of liability.

Elements of direct infringement. To establish direct copyright infringement, the court required EVOX to show (1) ownership of valid copyrights, (2) violation of an exclusive right under 17 U.S.C. § 106, and (3) causation in the form of volitional conduct by the defendant. Citing Perfect 10, Inc. v. Giganews, Inc., 847 F.3d 657 (9th Cir. 2017), the court emphasized that volitional conduct is a necessary element distinguishing direct from secondary liability.

The parties did not dispute ownership or the scope of EVOX’s rights. The dispute centered entirely on whether the defendants engaged in volitional conduct sufficient to support direct liability.

Volitional conduct analysis. The court relied heavily on the Ninth Circuit’s decision in VHT, Inc. v. Zillow Group, Inc., 918 F.3d 723 (9th Cir. 2019), which clarified that website operators incur direct liability only where they actively participate in or directly cause the infringing activity. Under VHT, plaintiffs must show that the defendant exercised control beyond general website operation, selected content for upload or display, or instigated the copying or distribution.

Applying that framework, the court found EVOX’s allegations insufficient. Although EVOX asserted that Expedia hosted images displayed in Google search results and used certain images as navigation icons, it failed to allege key facts demonstrating active involvement. The complaint did not specify who uploaded the images, how they were selected, or how the defendants controlled their display. Nor did it explain whether any third parties were responsible for supplying the images.

The court concluded that these deficiencies prevented a reasonable inference that Expedia or Hotwire engaged in conduct that was the “direct cause” of infringement. Instead, the allegations suggested only passive involvement through general website operations, which is insufficient under VHT.

Insufficient factual specificity. The court further noted that the complaint failed to identify which specific images corresponded to each alleged use. This lack of clarity compounded the pleading deficiency, making it difficult for the defendants to respond and for the court to assess liability. The absence of details regarding the mechanics of the alleged infringement, such as how images functioned as navigation icons, rendered the claims speculative rather than plausible.

Leave to amend. Despite dismissing the complaint, the court granted EVOX leave to amend under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a). Citing Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048 (9th Cir. 2003), the court emphasized the liberal policy favoring amendment, particularly where additional factual allegations may cure deficiencies. It directed EVOX to provide more specific facts regarding volitional conduct and to clearly identify the images at issue.

The Case is No. 2:25-cv-02602-JLR.

Judge: Robart, J.

Attorneys: Jason P. Casero (Callahan & Blaine APLC) for Evox Productions LLC. John D. Denkenberger (Christensen O'Connor Johnson & Kindness) for Expedia Inc.

Companies: Evox Productions LLC; Expedia Inc.

Cases: Copyright WashingtonNews