Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Cameo Clips

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
November 29, 2006

Theatrical Productions/Minimum Musicians Required

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York denied a union petition to vacate the portion of an arbitrator's award that allowed the producers of the Elvis musical, 'All Shook Up,' to use a reduced-size orchestra for their Broadway production. Associated Musicians of Greater New York, Local 802, AFM, v. The League of American Theaters and Producers Inc., 05-CV-2769 (KMK). The collective bargaining agreement (CBA) at issue allowed for a reduction in the required minimum number of musicians for 'Special Situations.' The producers of 'All Shook Up' sought to use a 15-piece, rather than 19-piece required minimum, orchestra 'to create a sound for the show that emulates a typical early-Elvis-type 'band.” The union, and then a designated Special Situations Committee, denied the producers' request. An arbitrator later granted the production Special Situation status on the ground that 'the proposed instrumentation, which includes both the number and type of instruments, was driven by the 'musical concept.”

Citing Elvis-recorded song titles, the district court noted: 'Rather than resolve amicably the Parties' dispute, the arbitration produced a 'A Mess of Blues.'' The union wanted the dispute remanded back to the Special Situations Committee, prompting the district court to comment: 'In effect, the Union suggests, 'Return to Sender.' Because the Court finds that the Arbitrator arguably drew her conclusions, and ultimately, the Award from the essence of the CBA, this case presents '(Such An) Easy Question.' ' For purposes of deciding the merits of this Petition, the Court need only find, and does in fact find, that the Union's argument amounts to nothing more than Petitioner saying that the Arbitrator misinterpreted the CBA, which is not legally sufficient for the Court to vacate the Award.'


Talent-Broadcast Contracts/Pro-Rata Compensation

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York decided that the term 'pro rata' payment in a talent-broadcasting agreement for an on-air analyst for NFL football games should be based on the number of weeks in the year that the agreement was in effect, rather than the number of games that the defendant announced. CBS Broadcasting Inc. v. Jones, 05 Civ. 10620 (DC). Former Pro Bowl NFL player Brent Jones was hired as an on-air analyst by CBS in 1998. Jones was entitled to $200,000 for 1995. The parties' agreement stated that Jones was to be paid 'in accordance with CBS's payroll practices.' CBS paid Jones a weekly salary of 1/52 of $200,000. But in Sept. 2005, Jones resigned three games into the NFL season over unhappiness with negotiations for his future services to CBS. The talent agreement stated: 'If Contractor [ie, Jones's corporation] or Artist at any time materially breaches any provision of this Agreement ' CBS may ' reduce Contractor's compensation pro rata, and/or CBS may, by so notifying Contractor during or within a reasonable time after such period, terminate this Agreement.' The agreement didn't define 'pro rata.' CBS filed suit arguing that it should be reimbursed the amount it had paid Jones in 2005 above 3/17ths ' based on the football season itself ' of $200,000. Jones acknowledged he had breached the contract but argued CBS's only remedy was terminating further payments to the football analyst.

Dismissing CBS's breach-of-contract claim, the district court noted in part: 'There is no reference to the number of games that Jones was obligated to call per year. Thus, there is no explanation for CBS's contention that Jones was obligated to call seventeen games, the number of games in the NFL's regular season.'

Theatrical Productions/Minimum Musicians Required

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York denied a union petition to vacate the portion of an arbitrator's award that allowed the producers of the Elvis musical, 'All Shook Up,' to use a reduced-size orchestra for their Broadway production. Associated Musicians of Greater New York, Local 802, AFM, v. The League of American Theaters and Producers Inc., 05-CV-2769 (KMK). The collective bargaining agreement (CBA) at issue allowed for a reduction in the required minimum number of musicians for 'Special Situations.' The producers of 'All Shook Up' sought to use a 15-piece, rather than 19-piece required minimum, orchestra 'to create a sound for the show that emulates a typical early-Elvis-type 'band.” The union, and then a designated Special Situations Committee, denied the producers' request. An arbitrator later granted the production Special Situation status on the ground that 'the proposed instrumentation, which includes both the number and type of instruments, was driven by the 'musical concept.”

Citing Elvis-recorded song titles, the district court noted: 'Rather than resolve amicably the Parties' dispute, the arbitration produced a 'A Mess of Blues.'' The union wanted the dispute remanded back to the Special Situations Committee, prompting the district court to comment: 'In effect, the Union suggests, 'Return to Sender.' Because the Court finds that the Arbitrator arguably drew her conclusions, and ultimately, the Award from the essence of the CBA, this case presents '(Such An) Easy Question.' ' For purposes of deciding the merits of this Petition, the Court need only find, and does in fact find, that the Union's argument amounts to nothing more than Petitioner saying that the Arbitrator misinterpreted the CBA, which is not legally sufficient for the Court to vacate the Award.'


Talent-Broadcast Contracts/Pro-Rata Compensation

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York decided that the term 'pro rata' payment in a talent-broadcasting agreement for an on-air analyst for NFL football games should be based on the number of weeks in the year that the agreement was in effect, rather than the number of games that the defendant announced. CBS Broadcasting Inc. v. Jones, 05 Civ. 10620 (DC). Former Pro Bowl NFL player Brent Jones was hired as an on-air analyst by CBS in 1998. Jones was entitled to $200,000 for 1995. The parties' agreement stated that Jones was to be paid 'in accordance with CBS's payroll practices.' CBS paid Jones a weekly salary of 1/52 of $200,000. But in Sept. 2005, Jones resigned three games into the NFL season over unhappiness with negotiations for his future services to CBS. The talent agreement stated: 'If Contractor [ie, Jones's corporation] or Artist at any time materially breaches any provision of this Agreement ' CBS may ' reduce Contractor's compensation pro rata, and/or CBS may, by so notifying Contractor during or within a reasonable time after such period, terminate this Agreement.' The agreement didn't define 'pro rata.' CBS filed suit arguing that it should be reimbursed the amount it had paid Jones in 2005 above 3/17ths ' based on the football season itself ' of $200,000. Jones acknowledged he had breached the contract but argued CBS's only remedy was terminating further payments to the football analyst.

Dismissing CBS's breach-of-contract claim, the district court noted in part: 'There is no reference to the number of games that Jones was obligated to call per year. Thus, there is no explanation for CBS's contention that Jones was obligated to call seventeen games, the number of games in the NFL's regular season.'

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Overview of Regulatory Guidance Governing the Use of AI Systems In the Workplace Image

Businesses have long embraced the use of computer technology in the workplace as a means of improving efficiency and productivity of their operations. In recent years, businesses have incorporated artificial intelligence and other automated and algorithmic technologies into their computer systems. This article provides an overview of the federal regulatory guidance and the state and local rules in place so far and suggests ways in which employers may wish to address these developments with policies and practices to reduce legal risk.

Is Google Search Dead? How AI Is Reshaping Search and SEO Image

This two-part article dives into the massive shifts AI is bringing to Google Search and SEO and why traditional searches are no longer part of the solution for marketers. It’s not theoretical, it’s happening, and firms that adapt will come out ahead.

While Federal Legislation Flounders, State Privacy Laws for Children and Teens Gain Momentum Image

For decades, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act has been the only law to expressly address privacy for minors’ information other than student data. In the absence of more robust federal requirements, states are stepping in to regulate not only the processing of all minors’ data, but also online platforms used by teens and children.

Revolutionizing Workplace Design: A Perspective from Gray Reed Image

In an era where the workplace is constantly evolving, law firms face unique challenges and opportunities in facilities management, real estate, and design. Across the industry, firms are reevaluating their office spaces to adapt to hybrid work models, prioritize collaboration, and enhance employee experience. Trends such as flexible seating, technology-driven planning, and the creation of multifunctional spaces are shaping the future of law firm offices.

From DeepSeek to Distillation: Protecting IP In An AI World Image

Protection against unauthorized model distillation is an emerging issue within the longstanding theme of safeguarding intellectual property. This article examines the legal protections available under the current legal framework and explore why patents may serve as a crucial safeguard against unauthorized distillation.