Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Entertainment Law & FinanceLJN NewslettersNewsSections

CA Supreme Court Hears Arguments In Talent Act Case

By Mike McKee
November 26, 2007
Hollywood had its eyes on the California Supreme Court last month when arguments were heard in a case that could shake up the way personal managers and their fame-hungry clients conduct business. The case has the entertainment world all atwitter because the outcome will have a major impact on the complex interplay between personal managers, talent agents and entertainers. Millions of dollars in commissions are at stake, not only in California but also in entertainment centers such as New York and Nashville, which have business connections with Hollywood.

'It's the fabric of how the industry works,' says Los Angeles solo practitioner Donald Smiley Jr., who is arguing the personal managers' position. 'There's a power struggle about who can do what between personal managers and talent agents.'

Managers v. Agents

Tension springs from the two professions' symbiotic relationship. Personal managers aren't regulated by the state, but have broad leeway to guide clients' careers by advising them on a wide range of activities, including job opportunities and personal life choices for example, for a 15% commission. Talent agents, meanwhile, are regulated by the California Labor Commission, and focus primarily on procuring jobs and appearances for a 10% commission.

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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

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 Image

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 Image

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? Image

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 Image

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?