Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

AXTS Inc. v. GY6Vids LLC

United States District Court, D. Oregon

October 24, 2018

AXTS INC., d/b/a Radian Weapons, an Oregon corporation; Plaintiff,
GY6VIDS LLC, a Texas limited liability Company, Defendant.



         Plaintiff AXTS Inc. (Radian) manufactures firearms and firearm accessories in Redmond, OR. They hired Defendant GY6vids LLC (GY6) to promote their products on a YouTube channel. Radian brings claims of fraud and unlawful trade practices against GY6 who, in turn asserts five counterclaims: (1) breach of contract (failure to pay); (2) breach of contract (confidentiality); (3) intentional interference with economic relations; (4) a civil action under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030(g)) (CFAA); and (5) attorney fees. Radian moves to dismiss counterclaims two through four.

         Because the facts alleged do not support a claim under the CFFA, Radian's motion is GRANTED as to the fourth counterclaim. That claim is DISMISSED with prejudice. Radian's motion is DENIED with respect to the remaining counterclaims.


         GY6 is a video production company with a focus on firearms related content. Def.'s Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Countercls. (Answer) at 51, ECF No. 15. In August of 2017, Josiah Underwood, Radian's Director of Operations, contacted Andrew Boetjer, GY6's CEO, to discuss the possibility of Radian sponsoring a GY6 video. Id. ¶¶ 52-53. Mr. Underwood proposed that GY6 create a promotional video featuring a Radian product to appear in front of a GY6 video. Id. ¶ 53.

         GY6 and Radian then signed a contract stating that Radian would pay $0.03 per view for the first six months that Radian posted the video to YouTube. Id. ¶ 54. GY6 alleges that it agreed to the discounted price of $0.03 per view with the hope that it would lead to more business with Radian in the future. Id. The contract also contained a confidentiality clause that restricted the ability of the parties to discuss the terms of the contract with third parties. Id. ¶ 59.

         GY6 created a 30-second video that promoted Radian and attached it to a video GY6 posted to YouTube on October 1, 2017. Id. ¶ 60. The video was viewed 527, 208 times in its first month of release. Id. ¶ 65. GY6 sent Radian an invoice for $15, 816.24 for the first month, which Radian paid. Id. GY6 then sent Radian an invoice for $42, 442.29 for the second month's 1, 414, 743 views. Id. ¶¶ 66, 70. Radian did not pay the second invoice. Id. On December 14, 2017, an attorney representing Radian sent GY6 a letter asserting that the contract was void and unenforceable. Id. ¶ 71.

         On February 5, 2018, GY6's counsel sent a demand letter seeking damages for Radian's failure to pay under the contract. Id. ¶ 74. Counsel for Radian maintained that the contract was “void and unenforceable.” Id. GY6 then experienced a rapid uptick in “dislikes” of its YouTube videos. Id. ¶ 75. GY6's videos had received fewer than 50, 000 aggregate dislikes in the six years that it had posted content to YouTube prior to its contract dispute with Radian. Id. On February 20, 2018, GY6's videos received nearly 19, 000 dislikes. Id. One month later, GY6's videos received approximately 4, 000 dislikes in a single day. Id. Specifically, GY6 alleges that Radian, “directly or indirectly, coordinated and executed a cyberattack on GY6vids' YouTube channel by causing an excessive number of dislikes to appear on GY6vids' videos, and by obscuring [Radian] as the source of those dislikes.” Id. ¶ 77. In response to the influx of dislikes, GY6 removed the video, and others, from public availability. Id. ¶ 78.

         On April 6, 2018, Radian filed the complaint in this matter and the marked increase in dislikes of GY6's content stopped. Id. ¶ 76. Radian alleges that GY6 breached its contractual obligations when it removed the video sponsored by Radian from public availability. Id. ¶ 78. GY6 alleges that Radian “orchestrated its cyberattack against GY6vids for the improper purposes of harming GY6vids and evading its debts.” Id. ¶¶ 77-78. In addition to the claims discussed below, GY6 alleges that Radian breached the contract by refusing to pay $.03 per view for the second month's views, or any later views. Radian does not move to dismiss that claim.


         To survive a motion to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter that “state[s] a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). A claim is plausible on its face when the factual allegations allow the court to infer the defendant's liability based on the alleged conduct. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 663 (2009). The factual allegations must present more than “the mere possibility of misconduct.” Id. at 678.

         While considering a motion to dismiss, the court must accept all allegations of material fact as true and construe those facts in the light most favorable to the non-movant. Burget v. Lokelani Bernice Pauahi Bishop Trust, 200 F.3d 661, 663 (9th Cir. 2000). But the court is “not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. If the complaint is dismissed, leave to amend should be granted unless “the pleading could not possibly be cured by the allegation of other facts.” Doe v. United States, 58 F.3d 494, 497 (9th Cir. 1995).


         Radian moves to dismiss the following counterclaims: (2) breach of contract (confidentiality); (3) IIER; and (4) a civil ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.