JS 44C/SDNY

REV. 4/2014 *
4 CV
ET**
5342
The JS-44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of
pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the
Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of
initiating the civil docket sheet.
PLAINTIFFS
Jason Gleed
JUDGE TORRES
DEFENDANTS
ALI DEE THEODORE P/K/A ALI DEE, DEETOWN ENTERTAINMENT, INC.,
DAVID JORDAN, CANVAS, INC. D/B/A CANVAS ONE PUBLISHING
AND/OR CANVAS ONE MUSIC. ASCAP. BROADCAST MUSIC. INC.. AND
ATTORNEYS (IF KNOWN)
"JUL * 6 2014
ATTORNEYS (FIRM NAME, ADDRESS, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER
Robert S. Meloni
Meloni &McCaffrey PC
3 Columbus Circle, 15th Fl, New York, NY 10019
CAUSE OF ACTION (CITETHE U.S. CIVIL STATUTE UNDERWHICH YOU ARE FILING ANDWRITE A BRIEFSTATEMENT OFCAUSE)
(DO NOT CITE JURISDICTIONAL STATUTES UNLESS DIVERSITY)
17 U.S.C. 101 et seq. and 28 U.S.C. 2201: declaration of copyright authorship and ownership
Has this action, case, orproceeding, orone essentially the same been previously filed in SDNY at any time? NtHfesIbudge Previously Assigned
If yes,wasthis case Vol. ("J Invol. |~J Dismissed. No["J Yes [~J If yes, give date &Case No.
ISTHISAN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATIONCASE?
(PLACEANM INONEBOXONLY)
TOUTS
No Yes
NATURE OF SUIT
[J 110
[]120
11130
1)140
[1150
11151
11152
11160
[Xl190
n Tae
niae
PERSONAL INJURY
[ J 310 AIRPLANE
[ )315 AIRPLANE PRODUCT
LIABILITY
[ ] 320 ASSAULT, LIBEL &
SLANDER
[ ) 330 FEDERAL
EMPLOYERS'
LIABILITY
[ ]340 MARINE
[ ] 345 MARINE PRODUCT
LIABILITY
[ ]350 MOTOR VEHICLE
[ ]355 MOTOR VEHICLE
PRODUCT LIABILITY
[ ] 360 OTHER PERSONAL
INJURY
[ J362 PERSONAL INJURY -
MED MALPRACTICE
INSURANCE
MARINE
MILLER ACT
NEGOTIABLE
INSTRUMENT
RECOVERY OF
OVERPAYMENT &
ENFORCEMENT
OF JUDGMENT
MEDICARE ACT
RECOVERY OF
DEFAULTED
STUDENT LOANS
(EXCL VETERANS)
RECOVERY OF
OVERPAYMENT
OF VETERAN'S
BENEFITS
STOCKHOLDERS
SUITS
OTHER
CONTRACT
CONTRACT
PRODUCT
LIABILITY
FRANCHISE
PERSONAL INJURY FORFEITURE/PENALTY
[ ] 367 HEALTHCARe
PHARMACEUTICAL PERSONAL ( , 625 DRUG RELATED
INJURY/PRODUCT LIABILITY SE|ZURE QF pROpERTy
[ ]365 PERSONALINJURY ,1 USC881
PRODUCT LIABILITY . . RannTUPB
I ]368 ASBESTOS PERSONAL l ' 68 OTMtK
INJURY PRODUCT
LIABILITY
PERSONAL PROPERTY
( ]370 OTHER FRAUD
[ ] 371 TRUTH IN LENDING
ACTIONS UNDER STATUTES
CIVIL RIGHTS
( ]440 OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS
(Non-Prisoner)
[ 1441 VOTING
[ ] 442 EMPLOYMENT
[ ) 443 HOUSING/
ACCOMMODATIONS
[ ]445 AMERICANS WITH
DISABILITIES -
EMPLOYMENT
[ ]446 AMERICANS WITH
DISABILITIES -OTHER
[ ]448 EDUCATION
[ ] 380 OTHER PERSONAL
PROPERTY DAMAGE
[ ] 385 PROPERTY DAMAGE
PRODUCT LIABILITY
PRISONER PETITIONS
[ ]463 ALIEN DETAINEE
[ ] 510 MOTIONS TO
VACATE SENTENCE
28 USC 2255
[ J530 HABEAS CORPUS
[ ] 535 DEATH PENALTY
[ ] 540 MANDAMUS &OTHER
REAL PROPERTY
LABOR
[ ]710 FAIR LABOR
STANDARDS ACT
[ ] 720 LABOR/MGMT
RELATIONS
[ ] 740 RAILWAY LABOR ACT
[ ] 751 FAMILY MEDICAL
LEAVE ACT (FMLA)
[ ) 790 OTHER LABOR
LITIGATION
[ J791 EMPL RET INC
SECURITY ACT
IMMIGRATION
[ ]462 NATURALIZATION
APPLICATION
[ ] 465 OTHER IMMIGRATION
ACTIONS
11210
[ ]220
( ]230
I I 240
II 245
(]290
LAND
CONDEMNATION
FORECLOSURE
RENT LEASE &
EJECTMENT
TORTS TO LAND
TORT PRODUCT
LIABILITY
ALL OTHER
REAL PROPERTY
Check ifdemanded incomplaint:
CHECK IF THIS IS ACLASS ACTION
UNDER F.R.C.P. 23
PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS
[ ] 550 CIVIL RIGHTS
[ ] 555 PRISON CONDITION
( ] 560 CIVIL DETAINEE
CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT
"**-
ACTIONS UNDER STATUTES
BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
[ )422 APPEAL
28 USC 158
I 1 375 FALSE CLAIMS
( (400 STATE
REAPPORTIONMENT
[ ) 423 WITHDRAWAL
28 USC 157
PROPERTY RIGHTS
[ )410 ANTITRUST
[ ]430 BANKS & BANKING
[ 1450 COMMERCE
[ ]460 DEPORTATION
[ ]470 RACKETEER INFLU
ENCED & CORRUPT
M 620 COPYRIGHTS
[ ) 830 PATENT
[ J840 TRADEMARK
ORGANIZATION ACT
(RICO)
[ ]480 CONSUMER CREDIT
[ ] 490 CABLE/SATELLITE TV
SOCIAL SECURITY [ ]850 SECURITIES/
COMMODITIES/
( ]861 HIA (1395ff)
( ] 862 BLACK LUNG (923)
( ]863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
| ]864 SSID TITLE XVI
[ ]865 RSI (405(g))
EXCHANGE
[ ] 890 OTHER STATUTORY
ACTIONS
[ ] 891 AGRICULTURAL ACTS
FEDERAL TAX SUITS
[ ] 870 TAXES (U.S. Plaintiff or
Defendant)
[ ] 871 IRS-THIRD PARTY
26 USC 7609
[ J 893 ENVIRONMENTAL
MATTERS
( ) 895 FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION ACT
[ ) 896 ARBITRATION
[ ] 899 ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEDURE ACT/REVIEW OR
APPEAL OF AGENCY DECISION
[ ] 950 CONSTITUTIONALITY OF
STATE STATUTES

DEMAND $_ OTHER
DO YOU CLAIM THIS CASE IS RELATED TO A CIVIL CASE NOW PENDING IN S.D.N.Y.?
JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
CheckYES onlyifdemandedincomplaint
JURY DEMAND: S YES LJNO NOTE: You must also submit at the time of filing the Statement of Relatedness form (Form IH-32).
(PLACEANx INONE BOXONLY) ORIGIN
HD 1 Original U 2 Removed from L-l 3 Remanded D 4 Reinstated or O 5 Transferred from 6 Multidistrict
Proceeding 5,ate Q0urx from Reopened (Specify District) Litigation
a. .Ilp.rttor.pn.mt.d Appellate
1' Court
I | b. At lust one
party Is pro se.
(PLACEANxINONEBOXONLY) BASIS OF JURISDICTION IFDIVERSITY, INDICATE
1 U.S. PLAINTIFF 2 U.S. DEFENDANT [x] 3 FEDERAL QUESTION D4 DIVERSITY CITIZENSHIPBELOW.
(U.S. NOT A PARTY)
CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (FOR DIVERSITY CASES ONLY)
(Place an [X] in one box for Plaintiff and one box for Defendant)
I I 7 Appeal toDistrict
Judge from
Magistrate Judge
Judgment
CITIZEN OF THIS STATE
PTF DEF
[]1 []1
CITIZEN OR SUBJECT OF A
FOREIGN COUNTRY
PTF DEF
[]3[]3
PTF DEF
INCORPORATED and PRINCIPAL PLACE [ ) 5 [ ] 5
OF BUSINESS IN ANOTHER STATE
CITIZENOF ANOTHER STATE [ ] 2 [ ] 2 INCORPORATED or PRINCIPAL PLACE [ ] 4 [ ] 4
OF BUSINESS IN THIS STATE
FOREIGN NATION []6 []6
PLAINTIFF(S) ADDRESS(ES) AND COUNTY(IES)
Jason Gleed
c/o Gleedsville, Inc.
635 North Naomi Street
Burbank, CA 91505
DEFENDANT(S) ADDRESS(ES) AND COUNTY(IES)
AN Dee Theodore and Deetown: 373 Park Avenue South, New York, NY 10016 (NY County)
Canvas Inc., Format Entertainment and David Jordan: 4610 Hollywood Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90028
Broadcast Music, Inc.: 7 World Trade Center, 250 Greenwich Street, New York, NY 10007-0030
ASCAP: 1 Lincoln Plaza, New York, New York 10023
DEFENDANT(S) ADDRESS UNKNOWN
REPRESENTATION IS HEREBY MADE THAT, AT THIS TIME, I HAVE BEEN UNABLE, WITH REASONABLE DILIGENCE, TO ASCERTAIN
RE9IBENCE ADDRESSES OF THE FOLLOWING DEFENDANTS:
JOHN DOE ENTITIES 1 THROUGH 10,
Check one: THIS ACTION SHOULD BEASSIGNED TO: WHITE PLAINS
(DONOTcheck either box ifthis a PRISpNER PETITION/PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS
COMPLAINT.)
DATE 7/16/2014 -SfGfiATUR^FATTORNaYOFREQTORD
S MANHATTAN
RECEIPT #
Magistrate Judge is to be designated by the Clerk of the Court.
Magistrate Judge
ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN THIS DISTRICT
[] NO
pfl YES (DATE ADMITTED Mo.12 Yr. 1982 )
Attorney Bar Code # 1708O8O
v/
J-^C1
is so Designated.
Ruby J. Krajick, Clerk of Court by. Deputy Clerk, DATED.
UNITEDSTATES DISTRICT COURT (NEW YORK SOUTHERN)
JASON GLEED
o
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Gleed, Case No.
-against-
ALI DEE THEODORE P/K/A ALI DEE,
DEETOWN ENTERTAINMENT, INC., DAVID
JORDAN, CANVAS, INC. D/B/A CANVAS ONE
PUBLISHING AND/OR CANVAS ONE MUSIC,
BROADCAST MUSIC, INC., THE AMERICAN
SOCIETY OF COMPOSERS, AUTHORS AND
PUBLISHERS, AND JOHN DOE ENTITIES 1
THROUGH 10,
14 CV 5349
COMPLAINT & JURY DEMAND
JUDGE TORRES
Defendants.
Jason Gleed. ("Plaintiff or "Gleed"), by his attorneys Meloni &McCaffrey, P.C., as anff
_..;=: CO
for his Complaint, alleges as follows:
INTRODUCTION
en :x:F
d m
o
.z<-
Gleed, a talented musician, songwriter and performer, moved to this country from hf2
home in Canada to express his creativity and make his fortune in New York City. Like any
ambitious talent that wants to quickly become established in the music business, Gleed set his
sights on JSM Music, the then pinnacle in the world of commercial advertising music that had
accumulated a wealth of gold and platinum records, Grammy and Emmy awards, and every
advertising award imaginable.
At JSM, Gleed quickly established himself as a first among equals and was awarded a
majority of the major projects from a client roster that included Hershey's, American Express,
Dove, Chevrolet, Bacardi, Dodge and Lincoln. With his meteoric creative success came
economic remuneration and soon Gleed had saved almost $300,000.
During this period, Gleed was introduced to Defendant Ali Dee Theodore ("Theodore" or
"Defendant"), a charismatic music producer who sometimes provided independent services for
JSM. Theodore had his own growing film music business that he called Deetown. In late 2006,
Theodore convinced Gleed to moonlight on some film projects Theodore was soliciting;
including what was to become the first of the three films in the Alvin and The Chipmunks Movie
franchise. Gleed worked hard on this project and put in long hours working late into the night.
Based substantially upon Gleed's talents and efforts, Deetown was awarded the soundtrack work
for the film franchise. Thereafter, Theodore cleverly poached Gleed from JSM Music and
convinced him tocome and work onDeetown's film and commercial projects as anindependent
contractor.
Theodore promised Gleed that he would be compensated for his creative work as a
songwriter, performer, producer and composer, and that he would be paid his pro-rata share on
anything Gleed worked on, including all royalties payable in the future. Gleed never signed any
agreement to that effect and Theodore never kept his promise. Instead, Theodore surreptitiously
attempted to alienate Gleed from his intellectual property rights as well as his money.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. This Court has original and exclusive subject matter jurisdiction over this action
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2201, 1331 and 1338(a) because of the federal questions raised
pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act and since some ofthe claims alleged herein concern
federal questions which arise under the Copyright Act of 1976, as amended (the "Copyright
Act"), 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1367
0
over Gleed's state-law claims which arise from the same transactions or occurrences and
implicate the same questions offact and related questions oflaw.
2. Venue is proper in the Southern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. 1391
where the Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction and are doing business, and where the
acts complained of occurred or originated in such district. Venue is also proper in this judicial
district pursuant to 28U.S.C. 1400(a).
PARTIES
3. Plaintiff Jason Gleed is a citizen of Canada and is a permanent resident of the
State of California.
4. During the relevant time period, Gleed's business operated through his wholly
owned company, Gleedsville, Inc., a New York corporation with offices located within the
jurisdiction and venue ofthis Court during the relevant time period herein.
5. Defendant Ali Dee Theodore ("Theodore") is a citizen of the United States and a
resident of New York State. Theodore works and lives within the jurisdiction and venue of this
Court.
6. Defendant Deetown Entertainment, Inc. ("Deetown") is an entity formed and
operated by Defendant Theodore and others, including the other defendants in this action.
However, throughout the relevant time period, Defendant Theodore exercised complete
dominion and control over Deetown. Deetown is a resident of the State of New York and its
offices are located within the jurisdiction and venue of this Court.
7. Upon information and belief, Theodore is now, and at all relevant times has been,
anowner of Deetown and exercises total control over its affairs. In fact, Theodore's domination
of Deetown is so complete that the entityis merelyhis alter ego.

8. Upon information and belief, Theodore now operates, and at all relevant times has
operated, Deetown in violation ofthe Business Corporation Law ofNew York by disregarding
the corporate form required to give corporations an independent legal existence under that Law,
intermingling assets of Theodore and Deetown for their mutual convenience. As a result,
Deetown and Theodore are the alter egos of each other.
9. Because Deetown is merely a device through which Theodore operates, Deetown
and Theodore are the alter egos of each other and, therefore, Deetown is liable for any breaches
by Theodore of the oral agreement with Gleed, and vice versa.
10. Upon information and belief, Dave Jordan ("Jordan"), a resident of the State of
California, does business throughout the United States, including substantial business inthe State
of New York and within the jurisdiction and venue of this Court, through Canvas, Inc. and
Format Entertainment.
11. Defendant Canvas, Inc., doing business as Canvas One Publishing and Canvas
One Music ("Canvas") is a resident of the State of California doing business throughout the
United States, including substantial business inthe State ofNew York and within the jurisdiction
and venue of this Court. Upon information and belief, Canvas' music publishing catalogue is
administered in theUnited States by Songs of Kobalt Music Publishing, with offices in the City,
County and State of New York.
12. Defendant Format Entertainment ("Format") is a resident of the State of
California doing business throughout the United States, including substantial business in the
State of New York and within the jurisdiction and venue of this Court.
13. Defendant Broadcast Music, Inc. ("BMI") is aresident ofthe State ofNew York
doing business throughout the United States, including substantial business in the State of New
York and within thejurisdiction and venue of this Court.
14. Defendant The American Society Of Composers, Authors, and Publishers
("ASCAP") is aresident of the State of New York doing business throughout the United States,
including substantial business in the State of New York and within the jurisdiction and venue of
this Court.
15. John Doe Entities 1-10 are entities that are yet unknown or not necessarily
germane to the allegations in the Complaint but are believed to have conspired with and/or aided
and abetted the remaining Defendants inthe conduct alleged herein.
SUMMARY OF FACTS
A. deed's Creative History.
16. In the 1990s, Jason Gleed began performing as a solo artist, as a member of
various rock bands, and as the leader ofthe electronic trip-hop band called The Jonah Complex.
During this period he also became heavily immersed in the electronic dance music scene, and at
some point towards the end of that decade formed aduo p/k/a Hatjak with George Hatiras p/k/a
DJ Hatiras. The two men toured the world with Gleed serving as vocalist and instrumentalist.
Hatjak continued to tourintermittently until 2009.
17. In the late 1990s, one of deed's high school friends opened a music production
studio, which came to be known as Grayson Matthews Audio. Gleed was invited to work with
the start-up and he threw himself into the opportunity. Over the next five years Gleed worked
day and night perfecting his craft. By 2001, Grayson Matthews Audio had become the hottest
TV commercial music company in Canada.
18. By 2004, Gleed had created an impressive music reel comprised of his award
winning work for some ofCanada's largest companies including Coke, Pepsi, Subaru, Wal-Mart,
McDonalds, Budweiser and some of Canada' largest Ad Agencies including BBDO, Leo
Burnett, Publicis, DDB and Cossette. Gleed nonetheless turned down an offer of partnership in
Grayson Matthews, and began working freelance while he started exploring employment
opportunitiesin New York City.
19. By 2005, Gleed had obtained offers of employment from some of the largest
commercial music studios in the business, includingElias Arts, Face The Music and JSM Music.
20. JSM offered Gleed the best financial package and the most diverse creative
direction, so in 2006, JSM sponsored Gleed's first O-IB Temporary Work Visa, and paid to
relocate Gleed to New York City with an offer of full-time employment valid until January 1,
2008.
21. Gleed's career took off from the moment he landed at JSM, and throughout 2006
and 2007, Gleed's music jingles dominated American advertisements. He won national
campaigns for Chevy, Ford, Alltel and Pepsi and got the opportunity to work on commercials
with talent from all ends of the entertainment spectrum, from Rev. Run, of Run DMC, to Kelly
Clarkson. Despite being on a base of $80,000 per year, his income was bolstered by
considerable performance income for vocal performances viathe Screen Actors Guild and/or the
American Federation Of Television And Radio Artists (hereafter collectively called "SAG-
^^m
AFTRA"),1 and for instrumental performances via The American Federation of Musicians ("AF
of M") until it exceeded $300,000.
B. Deetown and The Jordan Companies.
22. During Gleed's tenure at JSM, he was one of a group of seven writers and
performers. Ali Dee Theodore was an independent music producer who had established his own
special niche at JSM. Theodore's office space at JSM was always bustling with activity, and
Gleed soon learned that Theodore was developinga burgeoning film music business.
23. Gleed's tremendous success as a songwriter and producer at JSM was self-
evident. He was a self-contained producer, composing music and lyrics, performing all
instrumentals and vocals, and producing the final sound recordings entirely on his own.
Recognizing that Gleed was an incredibly valuable asset, Theodore approached Gleed in late
2006 to write and produce demos for submission to 20th Century Fox for the first Alvin and The
Chipmunks movie, set for release in December 2007. Theodore entrusted Gleed with arranging,
performing, and co-producing a rock version of the classic "Chipmunk Song"; as well as co-
writing, performing, and co-producing an original song, "Follow Me Now." Gleed's exceptional
work product helped secure the contract for Deetown to do the entire soundtrack. Gleed then
went on to write and perform another original song titled, "Abyss Of Death", effectively
becoming the singing voice of the iconic Dave Seville character, as well as performing lead
vocals for a cover of the Ramones' "California Sun". This soundtrack eventually went on to win
the American Music Award for Best Soundtrack in 2008. Theodore agreed to pay Gleed
1Until March 30, 2012 theScreen Actors Guild andTheAmerican Federation of Television andRadio Artists were
two separate unions. They have since merged into a single union called SAG-AFTRA. Any references to SAG
alone herein, orinany Exhibits, shall henceforth refer to both SAG and AFTRA asapplicable, aswell asthe merged
SAG-AFTRA performance union.
$15,000 for his production work on this film, and Theodore assured Gleed he would receive all
applicable AF ofMand SAG-AFTRA income separately.
24. It was during this initial project with Theodore that Gleed became aware of
Theodore's business relationship with Dave Jordan, a successful music supervisor and music
publisher in Los Angeles. Dave Jordan owns and operates Format Entertainment, a music
supervision company with numerous staff music supervisors. Jordan also manages numerous
music catalogs, such as Canvas One, comprised of songs available for licensing to film and
television.
25. In mid-2007, Gleed was asked by Dave Jordan directly to compose and produce
an original song to be licensed for the film, "American Pie: Beta House". Theodore was
unavailable at the time, so Gleed took onthe task alone - composing, performing, producing and
mixing a songfor that film entitled "MyEverything".
26. Around this time, Theodore and Gleed first discussed Deetown's arrangement
with Dave Jordan regarding songs licensed from the Canvas song catalog (hereafter the
"Licensed Works"). Theodore assured Gleed that he never participated in the so-called
"publisher's share" of the music license income under that arrangement. Theodore also told
Gleed that he would split all Deetown license income (hereafter the "License Fee") with Gleed
pro rata among the writers and producers ofany particular licensed song. In this case regarding
the song licensed to American Pie Beta House, the License Fee Theodore claimed to receive
from Dave Jordan was $5,000, so he agreed to pay Gleed $2,500.
27. In late 2007, Theodore made an effort to lure Gleed to work on more Deetown
projects. On December 17, 2007, Deetown successfully petitioned to secure a concurrent O-IB
Temporary Work Visa for Gleed. Theodore offered Gleed a chance to work on numerous
8
exciting film and TV projects, and promised that within ayear his annual income would build to
amounts far surpassing anything Gleed had ever known at JSM. The latter promise proved to be
untrue during Gleed's time as an independent contractor for Deetown, as his annual income
steadily declined each year despite his creative success working on big-budget Hollywood
blockbusters.
28. Gleed was torn about giving up his lucrative position at JSM, but Theodore was
relentless in his pursuit, and advised Gleed, "in order to reach higher levels of success,
sometimes youjust needto take a blindleapof faith."
29. In February 2008, Gleed finally agreed to leave JSM so he could work on
Deetown projects as an independent contractor, as is permitted under his O-IB Temporary Work
Visa, focusing on the filmand televisionbusiness.
30. Soon after leaving JSM, Gleed set to work on a number of big-budget film
projects for Deetown, including "Speed Racer", "What Happens In Vegas", and "Hannah
Montana: The Movie". Gleed continued his success on a creativelevel that he had demonstrated
with Grayson Matthews and JSM.
31. As an independent contractor for Deetown, Gleed worked in various creative
capacities on a number ofhigh profile film and television projects, including, without limitation,
theAlvin and TheChipmunks film franchise, themost recent Muppets film and the Matt Damon
film "The Adjustment Bureau". Gleed also worked on numerous large advertising projects,
including campaigns for Best Buy and AT&T. Acopy of the schedule of those projects and the
capacity Gleed performed onthemis attached hereto as Exhibit A.
32. Some of these projects involved Licensed Works. Typically a Licensed Work
allowed for a limited, non-exclusive usage of a particular piece of music taken from the Canvas
catalog ofsongs. These songs were typically made available for license to multiple clients in
multiple projects.
33. Others tasks involved custom-made, original compositions and/or productions
only for use in aspecific film or television project (hereafter the "Original Works").
34. Whether a job utilized a Licensed Work or Original Work was dependent upon
the wants and needs of the Film, Television or Advertising Companies.
35. Upon information and belief, the Film, Television or Advertising Companies
demanded an ownership interest in the Original Works. Some examples of Original Works
would include, without limitation: (a) Aremix or remake of a pre-existing song only for use in a
specific project, such as the remake ofthe theme song for Speed Racer in the Warner Brothers
"Speed Racer" movie in 2008; (b) An entirely original composition and recording made
specifically for one film only, such as the song "Let's Talk About Me" for the 2011 Muppets
movie; (c) An original theme song for a specific TV show, such as the theme for Disney's "So
Random"; (d) A song previously available as a Licensed Work that was purchased by a Film,
Television, or Advertising company for a specific project, such as the song "All The Way Up"
which had been previously licensed numerous times to various companies for various projects,
but then sold to the Disney Company for the television show, Shake It Up, and its associated
soundtrack, thus making it no longer available for future exploitation as a Licensed Work; or (e)
An original advertising composition created for use by a specific company, such as the music for
the2008 Best Buy holiday television campaign. Upon information and belief, in these instances
involving Original Works the hiring Film, Television or Advertising Company would typically
pay Deetown and/or Theodore and/or Jordan and/or the Jordan Companies, one or two separate
fees for a musical work as applicable - one for the rights to the musical composition(s) (the
10
^B
"Songwriting Fee") and one for the rights to the recording(s) performed and produced of that
composition (the "Production Fee"). In some instances, they would also pay fees for demo or
exploratory work (the "Demo Fee"). Finally, in other instances, a consolatory fee is paid when a
large amount ofwork is put into aproject, usually to completion, that is ultimately canceled for
some unforeseen reason (the "Kill Fee").
36. In exchange for Gleed's creative services as an independent contractor, Theodore
promised to pay Gleed apro rata, equal share of all income received by Theodore from any
source, including monies received by any of Theodore's companies, which would include,
without limitation, License Fees, Production Fees, Songwriting Fees, Demo Fees, Kill Fees,
or any recurring payments such as royalties, to be split equally among Gleed, and any other
writer, composer, or producer that contributed significantly to the particular composition and/or
soundrecording that resultedfromGleed's creative services.
37. Additionally, where Gleed functioned in the capacity of a writer or composer on a
particular composition and/or sound recording, Theodore promised Gleed a pro rata, equal
portion of the so-called writer's share, as reflected in the PRO registrations, and all associated
writer's performance royalties. Where Gleed performed in the capacity of producer on a
particular composition and/or sound recording, Theodore promised Gleed a pro rata, equal
portion of all producer royalties based on song and/or soundtrack sales split between the
producers. Furthermore, Theodore promised Gleed that hewould receive all relevant labor union
payments due to him. Theodore also assured Gleed he would be given proper professional
credit, typically on-screen, inthecapacities inwhich heperformed for a particular project.
11
^m
38. Gleed and Theodore never discussed or reached any agreement with respect to the
ownership of any copyrights in and to the compositions and/or sound recordings that involved
Gleed's creative services.
39. Gleed's oral agreement with Theodore was never memorialized in a writing
signed by Gleed.
40. In March 2008, Theodore attempted to have Gleed sign a contract with Dave
Jordan and Canvas Inc. The draft agreement submitted to Gleed by Theodore, which was neither
approved nor executed by Gleed, provided that Canvas, Inc. would become sole administrator of
all musical compositions written by Gleed, and required Gleed to assign to Canvas 100% of his
so-called "publisher's share" in perpetuity. Gleed was advised not to sign this contract by his
then counsel, who revised and delivered a new draft contract to Theodore in September 2008.
Theodore told Gleed he would pass this new draft on to Dave Jordan for review. Theodore was
insistent that he should remain the bridge of communication between Gleed and Jordan in this
matter.
41. Despite Gleed's inquiries to Theodore, no mention of this new draft was ever
made again by Theodore or Jordan, and no contracts were ever signed by Gleed.
42. In 2012, Gleed discovered that someone had forged Gleed's signature on a copy
of the original draft submitted by Theodore, and forwarding that "signed" document to Canvas.
Theodore has since admitted to signing Gleed's name on this contract. Gleed never gave
Theodore consent to sign this contract on his behalf, or otherwise affirmed the contract after the
fact.
43. Furthermore, upon information and belief, Dave Jordan and/or the Jordan
Companies would take a twenty percent commission on the all fees payable to Deetown by the
12
^M
Film, Television or Advertising Companies with respect to each Original Work, including a
twenty percent commission on Gleed's share of that income. This practice included, without
limitation, taking commissions on the Songwriting Fee, the Production Fee, the Demo Fee, the
Kill Fee, or any royalties generated by the exploitation of the music. However, Gleed never
knew of this arrangement, never agreed to this arrangement and never directly retained the
Jordan Companies as his agent in any capacityto obtain the employment at issue.
Upon information and belief, without Gleed's knowledge or authorization, Theodore
permitted the Jordan Companies to improperly retain this commission from the Film,
Television or Advertising Companypayments, which were then charged, pro-ratabased
on Gleed's contributions, against any share paid or due Gleed for the work he performed
on the Original Works. Theodore benefitted from surreptitiouslycausing Gleed to share
in Theodore's obligationto pay commission to the Jordan Companies because it directly
reduced Theodore's contractual obligation to the Jordan Companies
C. Workflow And Payments.
44. From the beginning, Gleed controlled both the manner and means of each creation
from start to finish. He exercised his discretion to work either out of his own home studios in
New York and Toronto, on the road in hotel rooms, or at Deetown's studio. The vast majority of
the time he used his own equipment and instruments. He employed highly specific and unique
skills honed over many years. He made his own hours and completed work on his own timeline,
subject only to deadlines imposed by the Film, Television or Advertising Companies. Gleed
always had the right to refuse Deetownprojects and was free to work on other projects for other
companies.
45. Gleed did not receive a salary or any employeebenefits, and no tax withholdings
on any payments were ever deducted by Deetown. Gleed was not issued a W-2 from Deetown in
any year during his time working on their projects, and he paid his own taxes as an independent
contractor. Despite Gleed's consistently excellent creative work product, output and results for
13
^B
Deetown projects, the remuneration didn't track his efforts or comport with what Theodore
promised Gleed, as Gleed later discovered. Gleed received random, periodic payments from
Theodore for his work. Gleed was never properly accounted to at any time during his time
providing independent contractor services for Deetown, despite his repeated demands for the
same, and upon information andbelief, Gleed has not beenpaidhis full pro rata, equal share of
the income Theodore has received from each and everyGleed-related composition and/or sound
recording.
46. Furthermore, any payments that were made by Theodore for Gleed's services
were made to Gleed's company, Gleedsville, Inc.
D. Labor Union Work.
47. As part of his services on the Deetown projects, Gleed would often perform
vocals for some of the films in which Gleed's musical work was incorporated. For example,
Gleed has performed vocals for some of the animated characters, and as a featured solo vocal
performer, in the "Alvin and The Chipmunks" franchise. In these circumstances, Gleed was
supposed to be compensated separately for those services by the Film, Television or Advertising
Companies, and properly credited for that work with SAG-AFTRA so that Gleed received the
proper payments for performing those roles (both upfront session fees and residual payments)
and proper credit towards his Health and Pension plans with SAG-AFTRA. Gleed had been a
dues-paying member of SAG-AFTRA since 2006, and was a member in good standing
throughout his time as an independent contractor with Deetown. A copy of the scheduleof those
projects where Gleed performed as a vocalist is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
14
^B
48. From January-December 2007, Gleed worked on the first Alvin and the
Chipmunks film entitled Alvin and the Chipmunks (2007) ("Chipmunks I"). He wrote and
performed the lead human vocals and some backing vocals of some of the Chipmunk characters
on the song "Follow Me Now", performed and arranged 100% of the instrumentals of the rock
version of the "The Chipmunk Song (Christmas Don't Be Late)" as well as sang some backing
vocals of the Chipmunks characters, composed and performed lead human vocals for the song
"Abyss Of Death", and performed the lead human vocals on the cover of the Ramones' song,
"California Sun". In addition, Gleed wrote and performed 5 instrumental and vocal demos for
the "Abyss Of Death" scene, performed and arranged various versions of the "The Chipmunk
Song (Christmas Don't Be Late)", did an instrumental and vocal demo for the romantic scene,
and made numerous revisions to all of Gleed's vocal and instrumental parts on various track
demos as per instructions from executives of Fox 2000 Pictures, a subsidiary of Twentieth
Century Fox Film Corporation ("Fox Films").
49. Without Gleed's knowledge or consent, in October 2007, Theodore submitted the
Deetown singer list, along with Ali's personal determination as to the number of hours Gleed
workedas a vocalist, on Chipmunks I to Fox Films. Theodore failed to properly credit Gleed for
his SAG related services. Theodore would decide what performer shares he thought Gleed
shouldreceive, and report those shares to the Film, Television or Advertising Companies without
ever consulting Gleed about their accuracy, which were never disclosed to Gleed. Indeed, upon
information and belief, Theodore credited other persons, including Theodore, for Gleed's vocal
performances in the film. As a result, Gleed was not paid for his vocals by Fox Films, and his
SAG Health and Pension accounts were adversely affected. Instead Fox Films has paid, and
continues to pay, the entire amount required for Gleed's vocals, including repeat-broadcast
15
^p
residuals, to Deetown and/or Theodore, leaving Gleed without any recourse. All this despite
Gleed being visibly credited as a vocal performer in the end credits of the film, and on the
soundtrack album credits.
50. In addition, Gleed's work as a musician on numerous film soundtracks and
soundtrack albums was improperly credited with the American Federation of Musicians union
("AF of M") on films that were signatory to the union, thus required to pay all instrumentalists
involved with the film. Gleed is a skilledmulti-instrumentalist, and would often perform all of
the musical instrumentals on the sound recordings embodied in the film soundtracks and
soundtrack albums he was asked to work on, and yet his account with the AF of M would not be
properly credited, resulting in Gleed losing both the resulting payment for that performance, and
the proper credit towards his union health and pension plan. Furthermore, Gleed has lost
considerable income via the Film Musicians Secondary Market Fund, which pays AF of M
musicians' additional fees once a film transitions from the big screen to any other form of media.
A copy of the schedule of those projects where Gleed performed as a musician is attached hereto
as Exhibit C.
51. It was later learned that in some instances Theodore intentionally left Gleed off
AF of M contracts entirely. For example, Gleed performed the entire instrumental for the cover
version of "Real Wild Child" for the on-screen version in "Alvin and the Chipmunks:
Chipwrecked" (2011) ("Chipmunks III"). Theodore willfully excluded Gleed from the musician
contracts that were filed with the AF of M for this film after explicitly engaging Gleed to
perform and produce this instrumental, and provide Deetown with the final mix elements to
submit to Fox. Theodore, who did not perform any instrumentation whatsoever on this piece of
music, as well as others in the Deetownstable at Theodore's direction, have been collectingAF
16

of M monies for Gleed's performance in this film, and collecting Gleed's contributions towards
their own pension and health. See Exhibit C.
E. Copyright Ownership.
52. As previously stated, Gleed and Theodore never discussed or reached any
agreement with respect to the ownership of any copyrights in and to the compositions and/or
sound recordings that involved Gleed's creative services.
53. Upon information and belief, Theodore, along with the Jordan Companies,
maintains control of the copyrights and/or receives an income participation in the publisher's
share of all publishing income generated by the compositions created in whole and/or in part by
Gleed ("Gleed Compositions").
54. Pursuant to music industry custom, in the absence of an agreement to the
contrary, music-publishing income from the exploitation of musical compositions is divided
equallybetween the music publisher, on the one hand, and the songwriters, on the other hand.
55. Theodore and Gleed never discussed, no less agreed upon, anything having to do
with the ownership of the copyrights of the Gleed Compositions. Gleed never signed any
document, including the document containing the forged signature referred to in paragraph 42,
above, and never specifically agreed that any copyright ownership interests in his music, to the
extent of his authorship share, would be assigned to anyone. As a result, Theodore and/or his
companies and/or the Jordan Companies have no ownership interest in any of Gleed's share of
the copyrights in the Gleed Compositions.
17
^a
COUNT I - BREACH OF CONTRACT
(Defendants Theodore and Deetown)
56. Gleed incorporates herein by reference in their entirety the allegations set forth in
the paragraphs 1 through 57 of this Complaint as if fully restated herein.
57. Through their misconduct, Theodore and Deetown have surreptitiously and
intentionally circumvented and vitiated Gleed's rights to receive an equal, pro-rata share of all
income generated by Gleed's prolific contributions to the musical works for the numerous film
and television projects created during Gleed's tenure as independent contractor for Theodore and
Deetown.
58. Through the aforementioned actions, Theodore and Deetown have concealed
monies otherwise due to Gleed through their agreements with Canvas and Format (hereinafter
referred to collectively as the "Jordan Companies").
59. As a result thereof, Theodore and Deetown have materially breached their oral
agreement to pay Gleed, on an equal pro-rata basis, all economic benefits Theodore received
through his exploitation of Gleed's creative works.
60. Gleed is without knowledge of the exact amount of monies due him from
Theodore and Deetown with respect to the exploitation of the musical compositions created in
whole and/or in part by Gleed ("Gleed Compositions"), and all recordings of those compositions
which were produced by Gleed and/or which embody his vocal and/or instrumental
performances during his tenure as an independent contractor with Deetown ("Gleed
Recordings"). The Gleed Compositions and the Gleed Recordings are herein below collectively
referred to as the "Gleed Works."
61. Gleed cannot obtain such knowledge or ascertain the exact amount of such
monies without a detailed accounting from Theodore and Deetown, with the assistance of Dave
18
^m
Jordan and the Jordan Companies, who have sole and exclusive knowledge of the income
derived from the license, use and/or other exploitation of the Gleed Works.
62. Gleed is entitled to an order of this Court directing Theodore and Deetown to
provide an accurate accounting which specifies in complete detail the information and
documents, including, without limitation, all related contracts concerning the exploitation of the
Gleed Works, necessary for an audit of their books and records relating to the use, licensing,
sale, performance or other exploitation of the Gleed Works.
63. Furthermore, Gleed demands that Theodore and Deetown make immediate and
appropriate payments to Gleed for any and all deficiencies established as a result of that
accounting, in an amount to be determined at trial, but in no event less than the jurisdictional
limit of this Court.
COUNT II - BREACH OF CONTRACT
(Defendants Theodore and Deetown)
64. Gleed incorporates herein by reference in their entirety the allegations set forth in
the paragraphs 1 through 63 of this Complaint as if fully restated herein.
65. Gleed is an author or co-author of the Gleed Works.
66. As more fully alleged in Count IV and Count V herein, Gleed also owns a ratable
share of all copyright interests in each of the Gleed Works, pro-rated to reflect his individual
authorship contributions.
67. Although in some instances Gleed had agreed to a limited non-exclusive license
of the Gleed Works to Film, Television or Advertising Companies, subject to the terms of his
oral agreement with Deetown, he did not authorize or consent to any assignment of his ratable
ownership share of the copyright ownership therein.
19
^B
68. Upon information and belief, Defendants Theodore and Deetown improperly
assigned Gleed's share of the copyright ownership interests in certain Gleed Works, including
improper assignments to Canvas and/or the Film, Television or Advertising Companies, without
Gleed's knowledge, permission or consent. This improper conduct includes the forging of
Gleed's purportedsignature on the document referredto in paragraph42, above.
69. Besides constituting a violation of Gleed's rights under the Copyright Act, 17
U.S.C. 101, et seq., these improper assignments constituted a material breach of the oral
agreement, to the extent that they deprived Gleed of his ratable share in all copyright ownership
interests owned by Gleed in the Gleed Works.
70. As a result thereof, Gleed has been damaged in an amount to be proved at trial,
but in no event less than the jurisdictional limit of this Court.
COUNT III - FRAUD
(Defendants Theodore and Deetown)
71. Gleed incorporates herein by reference in their entirety the allegations set forth in
the paragraphs 1 through 70 of this Complaint as if fully restated herein.
72. Theodore had an obligation to Gleed and other performers to correctly report all
information concerning artist's performances and credits to each Film, Television or Advertising
Company for whom Gleed's vocal performance appears as part of the song incorporated into
their SAG-AFTRA signatory film or television project. That duty is to ensure that Gleed and
other performers received the appropriate performance fees and residuals, and credits to the
SAG-AFTRA union health and benefit plans. Similarly, Theodore had an obligation to Gleed
and other performers to correctly report to the Film, Television or Advertising Companies all
information concerning musical contributions andcredits to each Film, Television or Advertising
20
^B
Companies for whomGleed's musical performance appears as part of the songincorporated into
their AF of M signatory film or television project. That duty is to ensure that Gleed and other
performers received the appropriate performance fees and residuals, and credits to the AF of M
union health and benefit plans.
73. Gleedjustifiablyrelied on Theodore complying with his obligationwith respect to
accuratelyreporting Gleed's informationto each Film, Television or Advertising company so that
he would be properly and accurately credited for his work on these projects with SAG-AFTRA
and AF ofM.
74. Gleed has performed as a vocalist and musician on numerous soundtracks on
SAG-AFTRA and AF of M signatory film and television projects during his tenure performing
independent contractor services on these projects for Deetown. See Exhibits B-C.
75. For example, with respect to Gleed's vocal and musical performances on the
Gleed Recordings used by Fox Films in the Alvin and The Chipmunks franchise including
Chipmunks I, "Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel" (Chipmunks II) (2009), "Alvin and
the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked" (2011) ("Chipmunks III") and ancillary films or spin offs thereof
which embodied Gleed Works (the "Chipmunk Films"), as well as other films and television
productions, Theodore intentionally and fraudulently failed to report and/or submit the proper
information regarding those projects to SAG-AFTRA and/or AF of M and/or the Film,
Television or Advertising Companies, and failed to submit and/or report any contracts altogether
on numerous signatory films, as per the respective union collective bargaining agreements,
thereby depriving Gleed of rightful income along with associatedpension and health benefits.
21
^%
76. Upon information and belief, Theodore and Deetown have failed to comply with
their obligations to accurately report Gleed's contributions to the vocal and musical
performances on these projects.
77. As a result thereof, Theodore has received or otherwise deprived Gleed the
payment of the vocal and musical performance fees that were otherwise due Gleed as well as the
corresponding payments from the Film Musicians Secondary Market Fund, and the credits
towards the SAG and AF of M Health and Pension funds.
78. Gleed has been damaged by the loss of those vocal and musical performance fees
in an amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than the jurisdictional amount.
79. As a result thereof, Gleed demands the recovery of his actual damages as against
Theodore and Deetown in an amount of to be determined at trial, including: (i) all vocal and
musical performance fees and residuals obtained by Theodore, or that Theodore fraudulently
assigned to others, attributable to Gleed's performances, (ii) the corresponding payment and
credit into Gleed's Health and Pension funds in SAG-AFTRA and AF of M, (iii) an order
directing Deetown and Theodore to correct or cause to be corrected, on a prospective basis, any
performance credits to which Gleed is entitled with respect to all productions in which he
performed.
80. As a result of Theodore's fraudulent conduct, Gleed also seeks the award of
punitive damages.
22
^B
COUNT IV - DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
AS TO MUSICAL COMPOSITION COPYRIGHTS
(All Defendants)
81. Gleed incorporates herein by reference in their entirety the allegations set forth in
the paragraphs 1 through 80 of this Complaint as if fully restated herein.
82. This claim arises under the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. 101 et seg_.) and is a claim
for declaratory judgments pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2201 for the purposes of determining
questions of actual controversy among the parties as hereinabove more fully appeared.
83. There is an actual, present and existing dispute between Gleed, on the one hand,
and the Defendants, on the other, concerning Gleed's actual authorship and copyright ownership
shares in the Gleed Compositions requiring an interpretation of the Copyright Act. Specifically,
the proper authorship share attributable to Gleed for those compositions, and the ownership of
the copyrights therein (to the extent of Gleed's authorship contributions).
84. Gleed acted, and was treated by Deetown, as an independent contractor in the
performance of all work for Deetown.
85. The Copyright Act requires that all assignments of copyright must be in writing
and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed. See 17 U.S.C. 204(a). Gleed did not sign any
document assigning any copyright interests in the Gleed Compositions to any Defendant. That
includes, without limitation, the forged signature on the document referred to in paragraph 36
above.
86. Theodore controlled all information provided to the Jordan Companies, the Film,
Television or Advertising Companies and the music performing rights organizations such as
ASCAP and BMI, who in turn furnished that information to their Canadian counterpart SOCAN
(hereafter ASCAP, BMI and SOCAN are referred to as a "PRO" or "PROs") in connection with
23
^H
the Gleed Compositions, including providing them with the "writer splits" for each Gleed
Compositions.
87. More importantly, the share attributed to each writer determines their financial
interest in each song, and the amount of publishing revenues they are entitled to be paid (both
writer's share and their retained co-publisher share).
88. Public performance income collected by a publishing agent was handled the same
way. The typical policy of a PRO is such that the so-called writer share of public performance
income must be paid directly to the songwriter, regardless of any agreement between the writer
and his/her publisher to the contrary. This policy was implemented by PROs decades ago to
prevent abuses by unscrupulous music publishers.
89. The Defendants easily circumvented that restriction.
90. For nearly every Gleed Composition co-written by Gleed and other writers
working with the Defendants reported writer splits to a PRO, according Gleed writer shares
which were less than his actual authorship contribution.
91. With respect to certain Gleed Compositions co-written by Gleed and other writers
working with the Defendants failed to accord Gleed any writer shares at all, and instead
Theodore claimed the writer share properly attributable to Gleed, or in some cases claimed for
himself a writer share in excess of what Theodore was entitled to receive. The Defendants also
did not credit Gleed with any of the so-called publisher's share of performance income paid by
the PROs either.
92. The Defendants fraudulently deprived Gleed of his full share of writer credits and
co-ownership of the Gleed Compositions by fraudulently claiming writer credits for Theodore
despite his not having written many of the songs, or having co-written portions thereof and
24
claiming a larger writer share then he deserved. Even worse, in many cases Theodore took a
much greater share than the shares he accorded to Gleed.
93. For example, 75% of the music and lyrics for the song "Let's Talk About Me,"
which appeared in the movie entitled "The Muppets" (2011), was composed by Gleed.
However, Gleed's contributions were not credited at all with the PROs. Moreover, Gleed was
denied professionally valuable on-screen credit and/or mention in numerous publicity articles for
the film. Instead, Theodore took all the credit, including the 75% of the songwriting income for
himself, knowing he contributed no original compositional input to the song whatsoever and that
Gleed was the true 75% composer of the song. Theodore's role was only as producer, and thus
has been fraudulently collecting PRO income rightfully belonging to Gleed.
94. Gleed seeks a declaration from this Court as to the true co-authorship and co-
ownership shares due Gleed for the Gleed Compositions, and further declaring Gleed's
entitlement to 100% of his pro-rata ownership share of the copyrights and of the monies paid to
the Defendants for that share.
95. Accordingly, the dispute is ripe for a declaratory judgment by the Court. The
federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. 2201, authorizes this Court to declare the rights
and legal relations of parties to an active controversy under its jurisdiction.
COUNT V - DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
AS TO SOUND RECORDING COPYRIGHTS
(All Defendants)
96. Gleed incorporates herein by reference in their entirety the allegations set forth in
the paragraphs 1 through 95 of this Complaint as if fully restated herein.
25
97. This claim arises under the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. 101 et seg.) and is a claim
for declaratory judgments pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2201 for the purposes of determining questions
of actual controversy among the parties as hereinabove more fully appeared.
98. There is an actual, present and existing dispute between Gleed, on the one hand,
and all of the Defendants, on the other, concerning Gleed's actual authorship and copyright
ownership shares in the Gleed Recordings requiring an interpretation of the Copyright Act.
Specifically, the proper authorship share attributable to Gleed for those recordings, and the
ownership of the copyrights in those recordings (to the extent of Gleed's authorship
contributions).
99. Gleed acted, and was treated by Deetown, as an independent contractor in the
performance of all work for Deetown.
100. The Copyright Act requires that all assignments of copyright must be in writing
and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed. See 17 U.S.C. 204(a). Gleed did not sign any
document assigning any copyright interests in the Gleed Recordings to any Defendant. That
includes, without limitation, the forged signature on the document referred to in paragraph 35
above.
101. Gleed seeks a declaration from this Court as to the true co-authorship and co-
ownership shares due Gleed for the Gleed Recordings, and further declaring Gleed's entitlement
to 100%) of his pro-rata share of the ownership share of the copyrights and monies paid to the
Defendants for that share.
102. Accordingly, the dispute is ripe for a declaratory judgment by the Court. The
federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. 2201, authorizes this Court to declare the rights
and legal relations of parties to an active controversy under its jurisdiction.
26
^B
COUNT VI- MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED
(Defendants BMI and ASCAP)
103. Gleed incorporates herein by reference in their entirety the allegations set forth in
the paragraphs 1 through 102 of this Complaint as if fully restated herein.
104. Defendants Broadcast Music, Inc. ("BMI") and The American Society Of
Composers, Authors, and Publishers ("ASCAP") are in the business of licensing the performing
rights of copyrighted musical compositions on behalf of songwriters, composers, and music
publishers, and distributes income derived therefrom as royalties to those members whose works
have been publicly performed or broadcast. It performed this function with respect to the Gleed
Compositions.
105. Such performance royalties are paid in equal shares to the music publisher(s) or
administrators and to each of the writers or co-writers of each composition. BMI and/or ASCAP
determine the "split" of each writer share based on the information the music publisher provides
to it.
106. For every Gleed Composition co-written by Gleed and other Deetown writers, the
Defendants reported writer splits to BMI and/or ASCAP, according Gleed writer shares which
were less than his actual authorship contribution.
107. With respect to certain Gleed Compositions co-written by Gleed and other
Deetown writers, Defendants failed to accord Gleed any writer shares at all, and instead
Theodore claimed the writer share properly attributable to Gleed, or in some cases claimed for
himself a writer share in excess of what Theodore was entitled to receive. The Defendants also
did not credit Gleed with any of the so-called publisher's share of performance income paid by
BMI either.
27
^A
108. Canvas claimed a 100%) publisher share of the Gleed Compositions for purposes
of BMI distributions.
109. On December 20, 2012, counsel for Gleed wrote to BMI to place BMI on notice
of the existence of a dispute relating to the failure to accord Gleed with any writer and publisher
credit for his contributions to the song "Let's Talk About Me" which appeared in the 2011
Disney film entitled "The Muppets." That letter also advised BMI of the larger dispute between
Gleed and Deetown for the other Gleed Compositions. Finally, the letter demanded that BMI
freeze any and all payments for that song pending resolution of the dispute.
110. On February 6, 2013, BMI's representative responded that it was BMI's policy
not to withhold any performance income that is the subject of a dispute unless BMI is named as a
party to a lawsuit.
111. All performance monies collected by BMI and/or ASCAP were entrusted to
BMI's and/or ASCAP's custody for the benefit of the actual writers and publishers of each song
they administer.
112. BMI and ASCAP have wrongfully withheld monies otherwise due to Gleed for
his equal pro-rata share of Theodore's share of the public performance income collected by BMI
and ASCAP with respect to the Gleed Compositions.
113. Equity and good conscience requires the restitution of that money to Gleed.
114. Gleed is entitled to an order of this Court directing BMI and ASCAP to provide
an accurate accounting that specifies in complete detail the information and documents necessary
for an audit of their books and records relating to such public performance income collected by
BMI and ASCAP.
28
^^m
115. Furthermore, Gleed demands that BMI and ASCAP make appropriate payments
to Gleed as a result of that accounting.
COUNT VII- MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED
(All Defendants)
116. Gleed incorporates herein by reference in their entirety the allegations set forth in
the paragraphs 1 through 115 of this Complaint as if fully restated herein.
117. Upon information and belief, during all relevant periods, Canvas and/or Format
collected and distributed income derived from the exploitation of the Gleed Compositions and
the Gleed Recordings. All such income, to the extent attributable to Gleed's creative efforts, was
retained in part by Canvas and/or Format, and paid in part to Theodore and/or Deetown..
118. Upon information and belief, in certain instances where the Film, Television or
Advertising Companies demanded ownership in the Gleed Works, Dave Jordan and/or the
Jordan Companies, without Gleed's knowledge or agreement, deducted a twenty percent
commission on the all fees payable to Deetown by the Film, Television or Advertising
Companies with respect to each production, including on Gleed's share of that income.
However, Gleed never knew of this arrangement, never agreed to this arrangement, and never
directlyretained Dave Jordan or the Jordan Companies as his agent in any capacityto obtain the
theatrical employment at issue.
119. Upon information and belief, without Gleed's knowledge or authorization,
Theodore permitted the Jordan Companies to improperly retain this commission from the Film,
Television or Advertising Companies' payments, which were charged or passed through (pro
rata based on Gleed's contributions) to Gleed out of any share paid or due him for the recording
and production work he performed in New York. Theodore benefitted from surreptitiously
29
causing Gleed to share in Theodore's obligation to pay commission to the Jordan Companies
becauseit directlyreducedTheodore's contractual obligation to the Jordan Companies.
120. Defendants have wrongfully withheld monies otherwise due to Gleed for his
equal pro-rata shareof monies paidby the Film, Television or Advertising Companies.
121. Equityand goodconscience requires the restitutionof that money to Gleed.
122. Gleed is entitled to an order of this Court directing Defendants to provide an
accurate accounting which specifies in complete detail the information and documents necessary
for an audit of their books and records relating to improper commission collected from money
otherwise due and owing to Gleed.
123. Furthermore, Gleed demands that Defendants make appropriate payments to
Gleed as a result of that accounting.
WHEREFORE, Gleed demands judgment as follows:
a. Count I: An order directing Theodore and Deetown, with the assistance of Dave
Jordan on behalf of Defendants Format Entertainment and Canvas, Inc., to provide
an accurate accounting which specifies in complete detail the information and
documents, including, without limitation, all related contracts concerning the
exploitation of the Gleed Works, necessary for an audit of their books and records
relating to the use, licensing, sale, performance or other exploitation of the Gleed
Works, and directing payment to Gleed by Theodore and Deetown of Gleed's equal
pro-rata share of all economic benefits Theodore and Deetown received from any
source through the exploitation of the Gleed Works;
30
Count II: Awarding Gleed his actual damages in an amount to be proven at trial
suffered by Gleed as a result of any improper assignments by Theodore and Deetown
of Gleed's share of the copyright ownership interests in the Gleed Works;
Count III: Awarding Gleed his actual damages as against Theodore and Deetown in
an amount of to be determined at trial, including: (i) all vocal and musical
performance fees obtained by Theodore attributable to Gleed's performances, (ii) the
corresponding payment and credit into Gleed's Health and Pension funds in SAG
and AF of M, (iii) an order directing Deetown and Theodore to correct or cause to be
corrected, on a prospective basis, any performance credits to which Gleed is entitled
with respect to all productions in which he performed, and (iv) punitive damages;
Count IV: A declaration from this Court as to the true co-authorship and co-
ownership shares due Gleed for the Gleed Compositions, and further declaring
Gleed's entitlement to 100%> of his pro-rata ownership share of the copyrights and
of the monies paid to the Defendants for that share;
Count V: A declaration from this Court as to the true co-authorship and co-
ownership shares due Gleed for the Gleed Recordings, and further declaring Gleed's
entitlement to 100% of his pro-rata share of the ownership share of the copyrights
and monies paid to the Defendants for that share;
Count VI: An accounting of and restitution to Gleed of any money wrongfully
withheld and/or otherwise due to Gleed for his pro-rata share of the public
performance income collected by BMI and ASCAP with respect to the Gleed
Compositions;
31
g. Count VII: An accounting of and restitution to Gleed of any money paid from his
pro rata share of income by Theodore and Deetown to Format and Canvas as
commissions;
h. The costs of this action, including reasonable attorney's fees and expert witness fees;
and
i. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
JURY DEMAND
Gleed demands a trial by jury of all issues which are so triable.
Dated: July 15, 2014
M
Robert S. Meloni
Thomas P. McCaffrey
3 Columbus Circle - 15th Floor
New York, New York 10019
Tel: (212)520-6089
Attorneysfor PlaintiffJason Gleed
32