Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York refused to throw out part of an antitrust class action brought by television station owners against SESAC, the music licensing organization that represents about 20,000 composers. Meredith Corp. v. SESAC LLC, 09 Civ. 9177. The ruling came just three months after a magistrate judge in Pennsylvania ruled that radio broadcasters are likely to prevail on similar claims against SESAC.
Like the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) and Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI), SESAC is a performing rights organization that serves as a clearinghouse for licensing copyrighted music on behalf of composers and musicians. Unlike its much larger competitors, SESAC is not subject to consent decrees with the U.S. Department of Justice. That means SESAC, unlike BMI and ASCAP, isn't forced into a “rate court” proceeding whenever it disagrees with licensees over fees. But that doesn't mean it's immune from private antitrust claims.
Case Background
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
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.
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.
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?