Bikram - OSYU - Complaint

7/30/2019 Bikram - OSYU - Complaint

1/7


2/7

123456

89

1 01 1t 21 3t 41 5T 6t 71 8I 9202 l22a aZ J

2425262728

Countyof SanFrancisco, as he business ddress f 50 CalifomiaStreet,Suite 1500.SanFrancisco, alilbrnia94lll and hemailingaddress f P.O.Box I 92444.San rrancisco,California94119. Membersof OSYU includeYoga nstructors, oga students ndbusinessesengagedn Yoga training. Membersof OSYU reside hroughout he United States ndworldwide.

4. Defendant,Bikram Choudhury, hereinafterBikram") is an individualdoingbusiness s"Bikram's YogaCollegeof India" with a principalplaceof businessocated nLos Angeles,California.Bikram owns,or is affiliated with, severalhundredYoga studios,mostly within the United States.

STATEMENT OF FACTS5. In or about1978,Bikrampublished book entitled Bikram's BeginningYoga

Class," SBN 1-58542-020-4,or which he receiveda copyright. In or about2000,Bikrampublisheda secondedition of "Bikram's BeginningYoga Class."

6. On or aboutMarch 4,2002, Bikram hled a supplemental opyrightapplication o"Bikram's Beginning Yoga Class" or authorship f a sequence f Yogapositionsand breathingexerciseswhich is identified by the United StatesCopyright Office asapplication March 5,2002,TXu-1-022-657."

7. In or about 2002,Bikram filed applicationswith the United StatesPatentandTrademarkOffice to obtain rademark egistration or Bikram Hot Yoga, Bikram's Yoga Collegeof India, Bikram's Beginning Yoga Classand Bikram Yoga.

8" On or aboutJune 17, 2002, Bikram filed a complaint,with a demand or jurytrial, for copyrightand rademark nfringement n the United StatesDistrict Court for the CentralDistrict of California,CaseNo. SA02-565 the"Bikram lawsuit"), againstKim Morrison andMark Morrison, the ownersof Yoga Studio,a Yoga teaching acili ty located n CostaMesa,California. A true copy of the complaint is attachedhereto as Exhibit A and incorporatedhereinas ully set orth.


3/7

II

L

JA+56789

1 01 1I 21 3t 41 51 6t 71 8t 9202 l22z )2425262728

9. 'fhroughout2002,Bikram, hroughhis attorneys, erved ease nd desist etterson businesses,ncluding hoseownedandoperated y members ifOSYIJ,engagedn teachingwhat Bikram viewed as his proprietarystyle of Yoga. Among other hinks, Bikram objected otheir violatinghis copyrightsand rademarks, mploying Yoga instructors hat had not beencertifiedby Bikram himsel f, teachingothers o becomeBikram Yoga instructors, nd forteaching dvanced lasses.A truecopy of sucha cease nddesist etter,served pona memberof OSYU, is attached eretoas Exhibit B and ncorporated ereinas ully set orth.

10. On February , 2003,Bikram'sYoga Collegeof India ssued press elease,by meansof their official websitewww.bikrarnyoga.com, tating n part as ollows:

"With greatpleasurewe would like to announce hat Bikram recentlysecuredfederal opyright egistration nder17U.S.C.Section 10 for his originalwork ofauthorship n his asana equence f 26 postures nd 2 breathingexercises....naddition o exactcopyingof the sequence,he copyrightprohibitsothers romcreating derivative' works of the sequence. irtually all modificat ionsoradditions o the sequence ill constitute opyright nfringement, ncluding: heunauthorized seof evena small numberof consecutive ostures;he additionofdifferentposturesor breathingexerciseso the sequence r portionsof thesequence;he teachingor offering of the sequence ith or without the Dialogue;or by the additionof extraelementso the sequence,ike music.Bikram will beentitled o receivean award of statutorydamages f up to $150,000perinfringementand can also recoverhis attorneys' ees rom infringers n lawsuitsconcerningcopyright nfringementof the sequence."

A true copy of the press elease s attached eretoasExhibit C and ncorporated ereinas ullyset orth. As of the dateof this action, he attached ress eleasewas still maintainedby Bikramand availableat the "In the News "sectionof Bikram's Yoga Collegeof India's official website.

11. On or about February24,2003, OSYU filed articlesof incorporationwithCalifornia's Office of Secretary f State.

12. On or about June 13, 2003, he "Bikram Lawsuit" was settled. Theterms of thesettlement re confrdential, owever,because f the settlement,he Court beforewhich that Lawsuit was pendingdid not addressand resolve he copyright andtrademark nfringement ssues n dispute.

13. As of the dateof this action.Plaintiff OSYU doesnot know of any awsuit on file,

OSYU v. BIKRAM. Comnlaint For DeclaratorvRelief 3


4/7

I2aJ

AT

6789

1 01 ll 21 31 41 5r 6I 71 8r 9202 122z )2425262728

in any stateor f-ederalCourt, n which the copyrightand rademark nfringcmcnt ssucs rrdispute,and allegedherein, areat issue. As a resultof'these ransactions ndoccurrences,hereis an unresolved ontroversy.

DECLARATION SOUGHT14. In order o resolve his controversy, laintiff equestshat,pursuanto 28 U.S.C.

Section 20I, this Court declare he respectiveightsanddutiesof thepartiesn this matterand,in particular,declareas ollows:

a. That no individual style of Yoga canbe the subjectof intellectualpropertyprotectionbecause ll Yoga exists,andhasexisted or thousands f years, n thepublic domain;

b. That no Yoga style, routine,or accompanying erbally communicated ialogue,meets he requirements, s set orth in 17 U.S.C. Section 102,of material hat canbe copyrightedunder he aws of the United States;

c. That no part of a routineof Hatha Yoga dentifiedasBikram Yoga is original;d. That Bikram owns neither he exclusiveuse nor control of any Yoga style or

routine;e. That an Open SourceYoga Unity members'verbal and or demonstrational

teachingof any Yoga style,whetheror not for profit, can not violate anycopyright;

f. That Bikram's trademarksare unenforceablebecause he term "Bikram Yoga" hasbeena freely and commonly usedconvenientdescriptionwithin the Yogacommunity for more than wo decadeso describe routineof Hatha Yoga in aheated oom and that any restriction of the use of that term would be contraryto15 U.S.C. Sections1064and 1127becausehe term is senericand wasabandonedby Bikram;

OSYU v. BIKRAM, Complaint For DeclaratoryRelief 4


5/7

Iz3+56789

l 01 l1 21 3t 4i 51 6l 71 81 9202 l22a az )2425262728

g. That any useof the term "Bikram Yoga" by an Open SourceYoga Unity memberto advertise heir services oesnot violateany trademark;

h. That an OpenSourceYogaUnity member's mployment f a Yoga nstructor,that had not beencertified by Bikram himself, o teachBikram Yoga doesnotviolate any copyright or trademark;and

i. That an OpenSourceYoga Unity member's eachinganother o becomea BikramYoga instructorsdoesnot violate any copyrightor trademark.

PROPRIETY OF DECLARATION15. A valid caseand controversyexistssufficient or this Court to declare he rights

andremediesof the partiesherein,becausehereare,and herewill continue o be,a substantialnumber of Yoga businesseshat are uncertainas o whether hey are violating copyrightandtrademark aws by continuing heir normal business perations.Further,Bikram has statedaclear ntention o litigate what he views asviolationsof his copyrightsand rademarks.

16. OSYU has he requisitestanding o request his declaration ecauseOSYUmembershave concretenjuries, his suit is germaneo OSYU's statedpuryose,and herequestedelief doesnot requireany OSYU member's ndividualparticipation. SeeBiodiversityLegalFndn.V. Badglev,284 F.3d 1046,1052 105319'h ir . 2002).

ll. This controversy s ripe for determination t this time because ikram hasannounced,n advance, is intention o pursue egal action o preventany"unauthorized"commercialuse of a routine of Hatha Yoga which he considerso be his property.

PRAYERWIIEREFORE, Plaintiff prays hat this Court grant udgment n Plaintiff s favor by

providingthe following relief:1. A declarationas ollows:



6/7

II

IJ

A+

6789

1 0l i1 2t aI J

t 41 51 6t 71 81 9202 l22L )

2425262728

a. Thatno individualstyleof Yogacanbe hesubject f intellectual ropertyprotection ecause ll Yogaexists, ndhasexisted br thousands f years, n thepubl icdomain:

b. Thatno Yogastyle, outine,or accompanyingerballycommunicated ialogue,meets he requirements,s set orth n 17 U.S.C.Section102,of material ha tcanbe copyrighted nder he awsof the United States;

c. That no part of a routineof HathaYoga dentifiedas Bikram Yoga s original;d. T'hatBikram owns neither heexclusiveusenor controlof any Yoga styleor

routine;e. That an Open SourceYoga Unity members'verbaland or demonstrational

teachingof any Yoga style or routine,whetheror not for profit, can not vio lateany copyright;

f. That Bikram's trademarks re unenforceable ecausehe term "Bikram Yoga" hasbeena freely and commonlyusedconvenientdescriptionwithin the Yogacommunity for more han wo decadeso describe routine of Hatha Yoga n aheated oom and that any restrictionof the useof that term would be contrary o15U.S.C.Sections 064and l27 becausehe erm s senericandwas abandonedby Bikram;

g. That any useof the term "Bikram Yoga" by an Open SourceYoga Unity memberto advertise heir services oesnot violate any trademark;

h. That an Open SourceYoga Unity member'semploymentof a Yoga instructor,that had not beencertifiedby Bikram himself, o teachBikram Yoga doesnotviolate any copyrightor trademark;and

i. That an Open SourceYoga Unity member's eachinganother o becomea BikramYoga instructorsdoesnot violate any copyrightor trademark;

2. All costsof suit includingreasonable ttorney'sees ncurred;and



7/7

1I

2-)456789

1 01 1t 21 3I 4l 5l 6t 71 81 9202 l22z)2425262728

J . Such urther relief as his Court may deemproper.

Dated: uly 9, 2003 THE LAW OF'FICEOF JAMES P. HARRISON

Attorney or Plaintiff Open SourceYoga Unity

JURY DEMANDPlaintiffOpenSource ogaUnity hereby emandsrial by ury on all issuesriable o a ury.Dated:July 9, 2003 THE LAW OFFICEOFJAMESP.HARzuSON

JamesP. HarrisonAttorney for Plaintiff OpenSourceYoga Unity

JamesP. Harrison


Bikram - OSYU - Complaint

Documents

Transcript of Bikram - OSYU - Complaint