Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Film Budgets Subject to Public Disclosure
The Supreme Court of Iowa ruled that filmmakers that received state tax credits couldn't enjoin the public release of the films' final budgets. Iowa Film Production Services v. Iowa Department of Economic Development, 10-1719. Iowa's Film Television and Video Project Promotion Program was enacted in 2007 but later suspended over government mismanagement issues. The filmmakers had asked for confidential treatment when submitting their initial applications. Final budgets, required to be submitted later, were sought by the Des Moines Register & Tribune. The state supreme court noted of the budgets information: “The record does not show that the Producers made reasonable efforts to preserve confidentiality of their financial data as against the outside world in general. ' The Producers failed to show, for instance, that individuals who worked for them and came into contact with this information were required not to disclose it.” The court concluded the final budgets didn't qualify as protectable trade secrets under Iowa Code '22.7(3).
“Stronger” Similarities Not Strong Enough to be Infringing
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit decided that Kanye West's hip-hop song “Stronger” didn't infringe on hip-hop artist Vince P's song of the same name. Peters v. West, 11-1708. Though finding that West may have had access to the plaintiff's composition, the Sixth Circuit explained in affirming dismissal of the suit: “Vince P's theory is that the combination of the songs' similar hooks, their shared title, and their references to [British model] Kate Moss would permit a finding of infringement. But ' in the end we see only two songs that rhyme similar words, draw from a commonplace maxim [i.e., Friedrich Nietzsche's 'What does not kill me, makes me stronger'], and analogize feminine beauty to a specific successful model.” The Sixth Circuit found that these were no more than “small cosmetic similarities.” (The appeals court's opinion is also noteworthy for its examination of how the tests for determining infringing copying are “surprisingly muddled” among the federal judicial circuits.)
Sublicense for U.S. Song Remains Valid in Russia
The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division, decided that a Russian artist had a valid sublicense to use a song by U.S. songwriters, even though the original song licensee failed to pay the songwriters full royalties. Murphy v. Lazarev, 3:10-cv-0530. Plaintiffs Taryn Murphy and Chris Landon had licensed their song “Almost Sorry” to the Moscow-based Style Records, which paid the writers a $4,000 advance but no further royalties before filing for bankruptcy. The license stipulated that it was to be governed by Russian law. Style had sublicensed rights to Russian musician Sergey Lazarev, who recorded a popular version of the song. Murphy and Landon later sued Lazarev alleging copyright violations. Dismissing the suit, District Judge Aleta A. Trauger noted: “Here, the plaintiffs and Style Records did not agree to cancel the Licensing Contract (see [Russian Civil Code,] Art. 450), nor, in the absence of such an agreement, did the plaintiffs file a claim to cancel the contract in an appropriate court of law (see, Art. 450(2)).” Judge Trauger added:
“[E]ven if it were true that Style Records went bankrupt in 2010, the plaintiffs have not identified any Russian legal authority establishing that such a bankruptcy would have extinguished the Licensing Contract (and the associated license to Almost Sorry) by operation of law.”
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.
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.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?