Most owners have never heard of a commercial sublicense. We read the complaint against the actual facts of your venue, how the signal arrived, who ordered it, and what account it came through, so you understand the claim before you respond to it.

Statutory ceilings are real, but a ceiling is not an outcome. We explain the difference between what a complaint demands and what a court may actually award.

G&G files almost entirely in Texas federal courts, with a smaller set of filings in Louisiana. We practice federal copyright and communications defense nationwide through electronic filing and pro hac vice admission, so you retain one firm, not two.

A federal answer deadline is short, and a default judgment is far harder to unwind than to avoid. We calendar it on the first call and tell you exactly how much time you have.

For eligible cases, we offer flat-fee representation, so the cost of defense is a known number before you commit.

We handle all contact with G&G and its counsel. You stop fielding calls and letters, and we work toward a resolution that closes the matter quietly.

The gap between the ordinary and willful damage tiers is the largest single variable in these cases. Evidence of how the signal actually reached your venue is worth developing early, not late.

Provider account records, POS data for the night, staff scheduling, and social media posts have short retention windows. We send a preservation list on day one.

Informal explanations offered in good faith routinely become exhibits.

Courts have discretion to reduce awards in appropriate circumstances, and a documented picture of a small venue’s finances is more persuasive than an assertion about them.

Complaints frequently plead § 605 and § 553 together, but how the program was delivered — satellite, cable, or internet — bears on which one fits.

Part of putting the matter behind you is confirming upcoming events at your venue are properly licensed.

The Alleged Conduct Is Pleaded in Categories

G&G’s complaints commonly describe a menu of possible interception methods: so-called black, hot, or pancake boxes; illicit smartcards or pirated satellite codes; representing a commercial address as residential to obtain a home-rate subscription; unauthorized streaming; foreign satellite feeds; and illegal cable splices. Alleging one of these does not establish it, and many venue owners have a straightforward account of how the program was ordered.

The Programming Is Often Lower-Profile Than the Exposure Suggests

G&G sublicenses boxing and MMA content to commercial establishments, including Bare Knuckle Fighting Championship, recently in the news through Conor McGregor’s involvement, and AMMA events. These aren’t always the marquee cards owners associate with commercial licensing, which is part of why the requirement catches people by surprise.

Where These Cases Live

The overwhelming majority of G&G filings are in Texas federal courts, with an additional cluster in Louisiana. Being sued in a district far from your venue is normal here and does not by itself mean you must hire counsel in that state.

Volume creates pattern recognition.

With 5,000+ clients across 50+ content plaintiffs since 2010, we know how this category of plaintiff prices cases, when they move, and what actually changes a number.

Federal litigation experience since 2006.

Our federal practice dates to 2006, and our focus on content-owner claims to 2010. Plaintiff’s counsel knows we are prepared to litigate.

One firm, wherever G&G filed.

Texas, Louisiana, or elsewhere: we represent clients in federal courts nationwide, so you aren’t paying two sets of lawyers.

Cost you can see in advance.

Flat-fee representation is available for eligible cases, quoted before you engage.

A real consultation.

A substantive conversation with an attorney, free and confidential, including an honest assessment of the weaknesses in your position.