Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A federal judge dismissed an antitrust action brought on behalf of retired professional football players who accused the National Football League of monopolizing the market for DVDs, videos and films featuring the plaintiffs' names and likenesses. Washington v. National Football League, 11-3354. In June 2012, District Judge Paul Magnuson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota rejected the notion that the NFL had violated the Sherman Act.
“Plaintiffs have utterly failed to make out a claim for violation of the antitrust laws, and no amount of legal tongue-twisting will turn their claims into antitrust claims,” the Judge Magnuson wrote, dismissing the case with prejudice. “What they have are claims for royalties, not claims for antitrust.”
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
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.