Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Exploring the Substantial-Similarity Test in Suits Alleging Breach of Implied Contract
Copyright-infringement cases alleging that a defendant improperly used a plaintiff's work for a movie or TV show often hinge on whether there's substantial similarity between the litigating parties' works. But substantial similarity plays a role in breach-of-implied-contract cases alleging defendants based their film or show on a plaintiff's work. A recent ruling by the California Court of Appeal serves as an informative review of California case law in this legal area and its current application.
In California, a breach-of-implied contract essentially alleges that a plaintiff submitted an idea to a defendant who impliedly promised to credit and compensate the plaintiff for use of the idea. Celebrity-events-crasher Rex Reginald drafted 'The Party Crasher's Handbook' and a synopsis. Reginald's representative, Neil Portman, pitched a party-crasher movie concept to United Talent Agency (UTA), which passed on the project. Reginald also claimed he informed New Line Cinema-affiliated producer Robert Shaye about the movie concept, and followed-up with a call and materials submission to New Line, which also rejected the movie project.
Two years later, Reginald filed suit against New Line and UTA and its affiliated talent agent Nick Stevens, after discovering that New Line had a movie entitled 'Wedding Crashers' in production. Reginald's complaint included a claim of breach of implied contract. The Los Angeles Superior Court granted motions for summary judgment filed by New Line and UTA by deciding that the Reginald's concept and 'Wedding Crashers' weren't substantially similar.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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
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
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?
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
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?