Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<B><I>Decision of Note</b></i>'Daily Show' Wins Dispute on Fair Use
A Manhattan federal district court decided that the airing of an unlicensed clip from a public access TV show to introduce a segment on Comedy Central's “The Daily Show” constituted fair use under copyright law. Kane v. Comedy Partners, 00-158. The “Daily Show” segment at issue opened with a one-second, full-screen shot of the plaintiff ' comedienne/stripper Sandy Kane ' dancing in a bikini. The title of “The Sandy Kane T.V. Show” is visible in the background. The clip is then further shown briefly as part of a video collage. A shorter clip of Sandy Kane's show is used in a commercial promoting “The Daily Show.”
Granting summary judgment for the defendants, the district court noted that the “Daily Show” use was not a parody, but added: “The only significance of deeming a work a parody is the concomitant determination that the work contains elements of commentary and criticism. … By airing plaintiff's clip in a segment called 'Public Excess' and adding some derisive commentary, defendants unquestionably used [the plaintiff's] material for the purpose of criticism.” The court also emphasized that the defendants used “only one-tenth of one percent” of Kane's half-hour show.
The court went on to rule in favor of the defendant on Kane's federal trademark infringement claim under the Lanham Act and on her state law claims for unfair competition, false advertising, deceptive business practices, trademark dilution, defamation and violation of right of privacy.
A Manhattan federal district court decided that the airing of an unlicensed clip from a public access TV show to introduce a segment on Comedy Central's “The Daily Show” constituted fair use under copyright law. Kane v. Comedy Partners, 00-158. The “Daily Show” segment at issue opened with a one-second, full-screen shot of the plaintiff ' comedienne/stripper Sandy Kane ' dancing in a bikini. The title of “The Sandy Kane T.V. Show” is visible in the background. The clip is then further shown briefly as part of a video collage. A shorter clip of Sandy Kane's show is used in a commercial promoting “The Daily Show.”
Granting summary judgment for the defendants, the district court noted that the “Daily Show” use was not a parody, but added: “The only significance of deeming a work a parody is the concomitant determination that the work contains elements of commentary and criticism. … By airing plaintiff's clip in a segment called 'Public Excess' and adding some derisive commentary, defendants unquestionably used [the plaintiff's] material for the purpose of criticism.” The court also emphasized that the defendants used “only one-tenth of one percent” of Kane's half-hour show.
The court went on to rule in favor of the defendant on Kane's federal trademark infringement claim under the Lanham Act and on her state law claims for unfair competition, false advertising, deceptive business practices, trademark dilution, defamation and violation of right of privacy.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.