Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Film Production Company Loses Legal Malpractice Suit
The New York Appellate Division, First Department, decided that a legal malpractice suit against a law firm that was retained to help form a film production company should be dismissed. Candela Entertainment Inc. v. Davis & Gilbert LLP, 14687. Candela Entertainment and its co-founder Cynthia Newport sued the law firm Davis & Gilbert for allegedly failing to render proper advice on obtaining consent for transferring the rights in copyrighted materials used in the movie Dance Cuba . But the appellate court noted: “Plaintiffs never alleged that they would have abandoned or postponed the assignment of film rights and attendant intellectual property from the individual plaintiff's nonparty, nonprofit corporation to the plaintiff corporation, had they been advised by the law firm that the film involved licensing issues necessitating licensor consents in order to be freely marketable. The individual plaintiff had secured the licenses for materials used in the film before the assignment, and plaintiffs do not allege that they were unable to secure consents after the assignment.”
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York decided that Sony Music could argue that the “Iron Man Theme” was a work-for-hire when composer/record producer Jack Urbont created it for the Marvel company's Marvel Super Heroes TV show in the 1960s. Urbont v. Sony Music Entertainment, 11 Civ. 4516. Urbont sued over the alleged unauthorized use of the song and a recording of the “Iron Man Theme” in Ghostface Killah's 2000 album Supreme Clientele. In 1995, Marvel and Urbont had settled an infringement action by Urbont. The settlement agreement referred to Urbont as “owner” of the “Iron Man Theme.” But District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald noted in the Supreme Clientele dispute that “where defendants [i.e., Sony Music] seek to raise a meaningful challenge to the plaintiff's infringement claim by positing ownership in a third party, the seeming absence of a dispute between the putative owners should not forestall such a challenge.” The district judge went on to rule “the Settlement does not cause us to reconsider our determination [of 1960s works] under the 'instance and expense' test that the Iron Man Composition is a work for hire. Accordingly, we find that Sony has established that Urbont is not the owner of the Iron Man Composition and we therefore dismiss Urbont's federal claims.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?