Photographer Christopher Boffoli sues donut franchisor Peace, Love and Little Donuts over franchisee social posts of his photo

What was filed

The complaint is Document 1 in No. 2:26-cv-02219, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, filed October 11, 2026. It runs 19 pages. Counsel for the plaintiff is LJK Law, PLLC. The plaintiff demands a jury trial. (Compl. pp. 1, 19.)

The plaintiff is Christopher Boffoli, a Seattle photographer doing business as Big Appetites Studio. The defendant is Peace, Love and Little Donuts, LLC, a Pennsylvania company in Moon Township that the complaint describes as the franchisor of donut and coffee stores in Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, West Virginia, and Tennessee. No franchisee is named as a defendant. (Compl. paras. 7 to 8.)

What the complaint alleges

The work is a 2014 photograph of powdered-sugar donuts arranged as a snowy landscape with a miniature figure running a toy snowblower, registered as part of VAu 1-198-948, effective January 8, 2015. The complaint quotes Section 2.06.01 of the franchise agreement, which requires franchisees to send all marketing copy and media to the franchisor for pre-approval. (Compl. paras. 12 to 14, 18 to 19.)

It alleges that after a Robinson Township store posted the image in March 2023, Boffoli emailed the franchisor on March 31, 2023, asking it to remove any other uses, and that its Director of Franchise Development replied on April 5, 2023 that "one of our Franchisees" had used it and that it "will reiterate to our owners the proper use of images." Beginning in January 2026, it alleges, Boffoli found 50 more posts from 12 locations dated January 2019 to December 2022, often on the same dates with near-identical captions, and on information and belief some had his watermark cropped or removed. It pleads timeliness under the discovery rule, 17 U.S.C. 507(b). (Compl. paras. 22 to 27, 36 to 39, 47.)

Counts and relief

Count I alleges contributory infringement by inducement under 17 U.S.C. 501, and Count II alleges vicarious infringement, both pleaded as willful. The prayer seeks a declaration, actual damages and profits under 17 U.S.C. 504(b) or statutory damages under 17 U.S.C. 504(c), including a separate award for each franchisee and enhanced damages for willfulness, a permanent injunction, fees and costs under 17 U.S.C. 505, and interest. The complaint cites the 2019 licensing of comparable work for $36,000 but does not state a damages total. (Compl. paras. 16, 57 to 72; pp. 18 to 19.)