Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Courthouse Steps
CASE CAPTION: Warren Beatty v. Tribune Media Services Inc., L.A. Superior Court # BC333430.
CAUSES OF ACTION: Breach of contract and declaration of rights.
COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: In a written agreement in Aug. 1985, Tribune assigned plaintiff Beatty the film, TV and other rights to the Dick Tracy character. The agreement stated that Tribune had a conditional option to get the rights back by following a specific procedure that included giving Beatty two separate written notices, plus a 2-year opportunity to avoid the forfeiture by producing a Dick Tracy project after the first notice and before the second notice. In 1988, Beatty assigned most of his rights to Walt Disney Pictures but reserved the right to produce his own project during the last 18 months of the 24-month period following a notice from Tribune. There was a Tracy film in 1990; in 1994 and 1995, Disney produced an ice show featuring the character. In July 2002, Tribune, in a letter to Disney, asked if Disney would be willing to agree to Tribune reacquiring the rights without going through the formal procedure. Disney didn't agree. In Sept. 2002, Tribune, in another letter to Disney, claimed that it had already effected a reversion of the rights. Beatty wasn't notified of this claim. The same thing happened in Oct. 2004. The 2002 letter wasn't a notice to produce as required by the Beatty agreement. It did, however, make it commercially impossible for Beatty to produce a new Tracy project because of Tribune's claim.
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?