Photojournalist Dean Moses sues The Young Turks over two ICE airport videos posted on TYT Sports YouTube channel

What was filed

The complaint is Document 1 in No. 2:26-cv-13029, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, filed and dated November 6, 2026. The plaintiff is Dean Moses, described as a New York-based photojournalist. The defendant is The Young Turks, Inc., described as a Delaware corporation based in Los Angeles, California, that operates the TYT digital news network. Jurisdiction is pleaded under 28 U.S.C. 1338(a) and 1331, and venue under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and 1400(a). The plaintiff demands a jury trial. (Compl. paras. 3, 5 to 10, 67.)

The videos and registrations

The complaint says Moses recorded two videos of ICE agents inside John F. Kennedy International Airport on March 23, 2026, and first published them that day on X. It says a November 22, 2023 written assignment from a New York media company transferred its rights in his works to him. Copyright Office records show registration PA0002595029, titled "3.23.26_ICE Agents JFK_Moses.," registered March 27, 2026, and registration PA0002597948, titled "3.23.26_ICE Agents JFK (2)_Moses.," registered April 15, 2026. Each record lists that media company as author of an entire motion picture as employer for hire, Dean Moses as claimant by written agreement, and a first publication date of March 23, 2026. (Compl. paras. 15 to 26.)

What the complaint alleges

The complaint alleges that on or about March 24, 2026, The Young Turks reproduced both videos in their entirety, added its TYT logo and the caption "@DEAN_MOSES/TWITTER," and published them on its TYT Sports YouTube channel in a video titled "ICE Agents TERRORIZE Travelers as Airport Crackdown Kicks Off with FURY." It alleges, on information and belief, that the company downloaded the videos and edited them into its own video rather than linking to or embedding the post, that its host commented on the events rather than the videos themselves, and that the video has since been removed. It says Moses first saw the use on April 8, 2026, and that his counsel contacted the company's counsel on or about August 14, 2026. It alleges the infringement was willful, pointing to earlier copyright suits against the company in the district, including No. 2:26-cv-02416 (C.D. Cal.), filed March 6, 2026. (Compl. paras. 36 to 55.)

Claim and relief

The single count is direct copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. 501 et seq., alleging willful violation of the rights in 17 U.S.C. 106. The prayer asks for a finding of infringement of each video; actual damages and profits under 17 U.S.C. 504(b) or, at the plaintiff's election, statutory damages for each work under 17 U.S.C. 504(c), whichever is larger; an injunction under 17 U.S.C. 502(a); costs and attorney's fees under 17 U.S.C. 505; pre-judgment interest; and other relief. (Compl. paras. 58 to 66; prayer.)

Docket

The docket shows the complaint, civil cover sheet, summons request, the AO 121 report on the filing of a copyright action, and a notice of interested parties.