Steven Hirsch Inc. sues The Daily Dot, alleging unauthorized use of a Medusa sculpture photograph

The complaint

Steven Hirsch Inc. v. The Daily Dot, LLC, No. 1:26-cv-03137 (W.D. Tex., Austin Division), is a 14-page complaint filed November 9, 2026, with a jury demand. Steven Hirsch Inc. is a corporation with a principal place of business in New York County, New York. The complaint says The Daily Dot, LLC is a Texas limited liability company with a principal place of business in Austin, in Travis County, Texas, and that it owns and operates a website at dailydot.com. It alleges, on information and belief, that The Daily Dot is a digital media company that publishes news and commentary about internet culture and earns revenue by attracting readers to the website and monetizing that audience through advertising, video, and newsletters. (Compl. paras. 1, 3, 5 to 6, 27 to 31; pp. 1 to 4.)

The photograph

The complaint concerns a photograph of Luciano Garbati's bronze sculpture Medusa with the Head of Perseus, which it says Steven Hirsch Inc. created on the day the sculpture was unveiled in Collect Pond Park in lower Manhattan, across from the New York County Criminal Court. It says the plaintiff first published the Photograph on October 13, 2020, by commercially licensing it to a newspaper, and that on December 1, 2020, the Photograph was registered under Registration No. VA 2-228-133. It says the Photograph was registered within three months after first publication and that the plaintiff is therefore entitled to elect statutory damages and to recover attorney's fees under 17 U.S.C. § 412. (Compl. paras. 2, 21 to 25; pp. 1, 3 to 4.)

The Copyright Office record for VA0002228133 is a group registration of 36 published photographs, titled Steven Hirsch, covering works published from October 2, 2020 to November 25, 2020, with a registration date of December 1, 2020. It names Steven Hirsch as author and claimant. Its title list includes "10.13.20 Medusa.Hirsch.jpg".

The alleged use

The complaint alleges that on or about November 11, 2020, without permission or authorization, The Daily Dot willfully and volitionally reproduced and publicly displayed the Photograph in an online story at https://www.dailydot.com/unclick/mary-wollstonecraft-nude-statue-backlash/, and that it stored a copy of the Photograph on its own servers. It says the use was not an embedded post served from a third-party platform, and that The Daily Dot made its own copy, stored that copy on its own servers, and displayed the copy to visitors from there. It says the plaintiff first observed the use on January 8, 2024. (Compl. paras. 40 to 44; pp. 5 to 6.)

It alleges, on information and belief, that the Photograph was copied and displayed without a license, that The Daily Dot takes an active role in the creation, selection, publication, and display of content on the website, including the Photograph, and that it derived a financial benefit attributable to the use. (Compl. paras. 45, 47 to 48, 64 to 67; pp. 6 to 8.)

It says that as originally published by the plaintiff's newspaper licensee on October 13, 2020, the Photograph contained a gutter credit reading "Steven Hirsch," which identified the plaintiff as the author and which the complaint says qualifies as copyright management information under 17 U.S.C. § 1202(c). It says The Daily Dot distributed the display without the plaintiff's copyright management information, as there was no credit to the plaintiff on the display. It alleges, on information and belief, that the distribution was undertaken with actual knowledge that the copyright management information had been removed, altered, omitted, or not reproduced without authorization, and that The Daily Dot knew, or had reasonable grounds to know, that the conduct would induce, enable, facilitate, or conceal infringement. (Compl. paras. 95 to 100; pp. 11 to 12.)

The claims and the prayer

The First Cause of Action pleads direct copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 501 et seq. The Second Cause of Action pleads vicarious copyright infringement. It alleges, on information and belief, that The Daily Dot possessed and exercised the right and ability to supervise its representatives with respect to website content. It says The Daily Dot derived a direct financial benefit from the use and failed to prevent or stop it. The Third Cause of Action pleads removal and/or alteration of copyright management information under 17 U.S.C. § 1202(b). (Compl. paras. 74 to 103; pp. 9 to 12.)

The complaint asks the court to find that The Daily Dot infringed the plaintiff's copyright interest in the Photograph by copying, reproducing, distributing, publishing, and publicly displaying it without a license or consent, and that it violated 17 U.S.C. § 1202(b); to award actual damages and disgorgement of profits under 17 U.S.C. § 504(b) or, at the plaintiff's election, statutory damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504(c), whichever is larger; to award actual damages or, in the alternative, statutory damages of up to $25,000 for each violation of the DMCA under 17 U.S.C. § 1203(c); to enjoin any infringing use of any of the plaintiff's works under 17 U.S.C. § 502(a); to award costs of litigation and reasonable attorney's fees under 17 U.S.C. § 505 and/or 17 U.S.C. § 1203(b)(4) and (5); and to award pre-judgment interest and other just relief. (Compl. pp. 13 to 14, Prayer a to h.)

On the docket

On November 9, 2026, the plaintiff requested issuance of a summons, ECF No. 2, and filed a notice of filing copyright form AO 121, ECF No. 3, which the docket says was forwarded to the Director of the U.S. Copyright Office.