Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Peer File-Sharing/Developer Liability
On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California found StreamCast Networks, the Internet peer-to-peer file-sharing developer, guilty of violating copyrights through the unauthorized content sharing of its consumers. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd. CV0108541SVWPJWX. The U.S. Supreme Court had stated that 'one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is [contributorily] liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties.' Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd., 545 U.S. 913 (2005). The Central District's ruling set out the following list of activities that led its active-inducement finding:
The Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Eight, decided that the transformative nature of a character in the videogame 'Space Channel 5' (SC5) was a complete defense under the First Amendment to a suit by Keirin Kirby, the former lead singer of the musical group Deee-Lite. Kirby v. Sega of America Inc., B183820. Kirby claimed that she had developed a 'specific, distinctive' appearance of a 'fashionable, provocative, and funky diva-like artistic character.' In its unpublished opinion, the court of appeal acknowledged there were material issues of fact regarding whether Kirby's likeness was appropriated without her permission, in violation of the federal Lanham Act and state common and statutory law. For example, the court noted: 'Ulala's facial features, her clothing, hair color and style, and use of certain catch phrases are sufficiently reminiscent enough of Kirby's features and personal style to suggest imitation.' But the court of appeal added: 'Ulala [the videogame character] is not a literal depiction of Kirby. We agree with the trial court that any public confusion that Kirby endorses SC5, based on similarities between her and Ulala, would arise from a false assumption that the game could not contain a character resembling Kirby without her imprimatur. ' [G]iven the many dissimilarities between the Ulala character and Kirby, any public confusion arising from a mistaken assumption is easily outweighed by the public interest in free artistic expression.'
October's Entertainment Law & Finance, p. 8, reported on a ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana barring enforcement of a state statute that prohibited the sale to minors of videogames with violent content. The cite for that case was Entertainment Software Association v. Foti, 06-431-JJB-CN. Since that ruling, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma preliminarily enjoined enforcement of a similar state law, noting: 'Plaintiffs present strong arguments that the Act contains unconstitutional content-based restrictions and that the Act's language is unconstitutionally vague.' Entertainment Merchants Association v. Henry, CIV-06-675-C.
Peer File-Sharing/Developer Liability
On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California found StreamCast Networks, the Internet peer-to-peer file-sharing developer, guilty of violating copyrights through the unauthorized content sharing of its consumers. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd. CV0108541SVWPJWX. The U.S. Supreme Court had stated that 'one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is [contributorily] liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties.'
The Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Eight, decided that the transformative nature of a character in the videogame 'Space Channel 5' (SC5) was a complete defense under the First Amendment to a suit by Keirin Kirby, the former lead singer of the musical group Deee-Lite. Kirby v. Sega of America Inc., B183820. Kirby claimed that she had developed a 'specific, distinctive' appearance of a 'fashionable, provocative, and funky diva-like artistic character.' In its unpublished opinion, the court of appeal acknowledged there were material issues of fact regarding whether Kirby's likeness was appropriated without her permission, in violation of the federal Lanham Act and state common and statutory law. For example, the court noted: 'Ulala's facial features, her clothing, hair color and style, and use of certain catch phrases are sufficiently reminiscent enough of Kirby's features and personal style to suggest imitation.' But the court of appeal added: 'Ulala [the videogame character] is not a literal depiction of Kirby. We agree with the trial court that any public confusion that Kirby endorses SC5, based on similarities between her and Ulala, would arise from a false assumption that the game could not contain a character resembling Kirby without her imprimatur. ' [G]iven the many dissimilarities between the Ulala character and Kirby, any public confusion arising from a mistaken assumption is easily outweighed by the public interest in free artistic expression.'
October's Entertainment Law & Finance, p. 8, reported on a ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana barring enforcement of a state statute that prohibited the sale to minors of videogames with violent content. The cite for that case was Entertainment Software Association v. Foti, 06-431-JJB-CN. Since that ruling, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma preliminarily enjoined enforcement of a similar state law, noting: 'Plaintiffs present strong arguments that the Act contains unconstitutional content-based restrictions and that the Act's language is unconstitutionally vague.' Entertainment Merchants Association v. Henry, CIV-06-675-C.
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
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.
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.
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
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.