Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Counsel Concerns
A federal district court in Manhattan sanctioned a lawyer and his client for pursuing in bad faith claims against the company that holds the rights to the work of Edgar Rice Burroughs, the creator of Tarzan. Estate of Hogarth v. Edgar Rice Burroughs Inc. (ERB), 00 CIV. 9569 (DLC).
The estate of Burne Hogarth, a renowned illustrator of Tarzan stories, sued for a share of about $15 million in licensing fees paid to ERB by the Walt Disney Co., which produced a 1999 animated feature based on the Tarzan stories. The estate was represented throughout by David Smallman, now a litigation partner at Piper Rudnick, and a changing cast of co-counsel.
In a sharply worded decision, the Southern District of New York said that the plaintiffs and their lawyers could not present any good-faith claim that the Disney movie's depictions of Tarzan were similar to those of Hogarth. “Apparently well aware of the limitations to their claims, the plaintiff's litigation strategy was designed to coerce a settlement from [ERB] and to avoid a trial if at all possible,” the district court wrote. “Because of these tactics, the litigation was unnecessarily contentious and expensive and required extensive judicial supervision.”
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
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.
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?