Bit Parts

The Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, Division Three, held that the Motion Picture Screen Cartoon-ists and Affiliated Optical Electronic and Graphic Arts, Local 839, didn't clearly and unmistakably waive its members' right to resolve statutory discrimination claims in a judicial forum. Lopez v. Fox Television Animation Inc., B177245. The court of appeal also found in its unpublished opinion that a character designer who had worked on the Fox TV series 'The Family Guy' didn't waive his right to have a court hear his statutory claims, though he had first submitted his grievance to an arbitrator under the collective bargaining agreement.

Concert Injuries/Negligence

The Common Pleas Court of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, Civil Trial Division, decided that arena operators' negligence led to physical injuries sustained as a result of the cancellation of a concert. Heenan v. Comcast Spectacor, 00980. Michelle Heenan filed suit claiming 'riotous behavior erupted after the announcement [at the First Union Center in December 2002] that the hard rock band Guns 'N Roses would not play and that she was injured when she fell as she and other concert-goers hurried out of the facility.' A jury ruled in favor of Heenan. Affirming, the common pleas court explained: 'Plaintiff claimed that Appellant was negligent for failing to provide adequate security. … Plaintiff claimed the last-minute cancellation was foreseeable considering Defendants' knowledge of the Band's recent cancellation [of a concert in a different city] under similar circumstances and the resulting damage.' The court then concluded: 'Under Section 344 [of the Restatement of Torts,] Defendants owed a duty to Plaintiff to anticipate possible dangers and to take reasonable precautions against such. The hasty exit by nearly 14,000 Guns 'N Roses fans, all disappointed, some angry and some violent, can be considered harmful third party conduct referred to in Sec. 344 which Defendants should have anticipated and formulated a plan to protect visitors such as Plaintiff.'

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that there was a jury issue of whether a check endorsement satisfied the writing requirement of Sec. 204(a) of the Copyright Act for a transfer of copyright ownership of sound recordings to be effective. Rico Records Distributors Inc. v. Ithier, 04 Civ. 9782 (JSR). The district court noted: 'While an unlegended check will not satisfy the requirements of Sec. 204(a), such insufficiency may be overcome when a legend on a check makes clear that a copyright transfer was intended. ' Here, while the endorsements on the checks, such as 'Purchase of rights of EGC catalogue,' and 'Bonus on L.P. recording agreement,' are not sufficiently clear as to unambiguously evidence copyright transfer, they are susceptible to such an interpretation. Where contractual language is ambiguous, resort may be had to extrinsic evidence ' and plaintiffs have adduced sufficient extrinsic evidence to make a jury issue of whether these legended checks should be read as contracts of copyright transfer.'

Television-Programming Dispute/Judicial Forum