Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Bit Parts
Jury Instructions for Implied Contract Cases
The California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District upheld a trial judge's rejection of two of Terence Dunn's three proposed jury instructions in an implied-in-fact contract case alleging that the DreamWorks' movie Kung Fu Panda was based on Dunn's story outline, The Adventures of Zen Bear. The trial judge did instruct the jury: 'Substantial similarity [in implied contract cases] is determined by making a comparison of the two works based on the opinion of the average individual.' The jury then found no use by DreamWorks. But the lower court judge had refused to tell the jury: 'It may be found if you believe the movie is 'based upon' Plaintiff's pitch, or any material element of his pitch, or if you find that Plaintiff's pitch was the inspiration for the movie. Even if the similar material is quantitatively small '.' The trial court also declined to instruct the jurors: 'Differences between the movie and the pitch do not necessarily mean they are not substantially similar. You may find that differences between the movie and Plaintiff's pitch were deliberately contrived to disguise the fact that Plaintiff's ideas were being used.' Of the latter, the court of appeal noted in its unpublished opinion: 'No reasonable jury would interpret 'substantially similar' to mean identical. Accordingly, the jury did not need to be instructed that two works could be substantially similar despite changes, omissions or additions.' Dunn v. DreamWorks Animation SKG Inc., B236200.
'
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?