Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On July 6, 2006, in Clean Flicks of Colo., LLC v. Soderbergh, 433 F. Supp. 2d 1236 (D. Colo. 2006), the court granted summary judgment to several film studios, holding that the practice of making and distributing edited versions of the studios' motion pictures by the defendants, collectively known as the 'Clean Flicks defendants,' amounted to copyright infringement.
The Clean Flicks court relied heavily upon its conclusion that the defendants violated the plaintiffs' 'right to control the content of the copyrighted work,' which the court reasoned was 'the essence of the law of copyright.' 433 F. Supp. 2d at 1242. The court declined, however, to find that the edited movies were infringing derivative works. In analyzing the right of a copyright holder to prevent modifications to a work, the court presented two contrasting perspectives. While it concluded that there is a very narrow derivative work right, it asserted a broad right of a copyright holder to otherwise prevent modifications to a work.
Copying, Editing, and Distribution of Movies
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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.
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.
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.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?