Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Bit Parts
Anti-Bootlegging Statute/ Constitutionality
In a ruling of first impression, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California found 17 U.S.C. Sec. 1101(a)(3) of the federal civil anti-bootlegging statute to be unconstitutional. Kiss Catalog v. Passport Int'l Prods., 03-8514. In the suit by members of the rock band Kiss alleging unauthorized distribution of a DVD of a 1976 concert, the district court found the plaintiffs could proceed with their copyright infringement claim because they had pleaded ownership of the footage through a work-for-hire arrangement with concert promoter John Scher, registration of the copyright and alleged infringement by the defendants. The district court then noted that recordings made before Sec. 1101(a)(3)'s effective date of 1994, but distributed after, were covered by the statute. But the court concluded that by creating perpetual protection, the statute violated the limited times element of the copyright clause of the federal constitution. In September 2004, a Manhattan federal district court found 18 U.S.C. 2319A, the federal criminal anti-bootlegging statute, to be unconstitutional partly for the same reason. U.S. v. Martignon, 346 F. Supp. 2d 413 (S.D.N.Y. 2004).
Copyright Infringement/Access
A Manhattan federal district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants in a suit alleging that the Oscar-winning hit “Heart,” recorded by Celine Dion and featured in the film “Titanic,” infringed on the plaintiff's song. Jorgensen v. Epic/Sony Records, 00 Civ. 9181. On remand from the Second Circuit, the district court considered several new defense declarations, including from non-defendants and “Heart” songwriters James Horner and Will Jennings. The district court concluded: “Mr. Jorgensen, as the evidence developed on this motion clearly demonstrates, has shown no possibility, certainly not a 'reasonable' one and not even a 'bare' one that the authors of Heart ever had access to [Jorgensen's song] Lover. It is now crystal clear from the record on this motion that neither Horner nor Jennings were 'affiliated' with Sony during the relevant period of 1995-1997.”
Peer-to-Peer FileSharing/ Subpoenas
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 Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.