Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Big Talent Agencies as Defendants In Implied-in-Fact Contract Suits

By Michael I. Rudell and Neil J. Rosini
July 02, 2015

An elite group of large talent agencies have earned reputations as gatekeepers to success in the film and television industries. Non-client writers and producers attempt to share in that success by becoming agency clients or by having their ideas, presentations and screenplays accepted by the agencies for their existing clients. For example, an agency might receive an idea or draft screenplay from a non-client writer, bring it to a client's attention and then negotiate the deal for that client to acquire rights. The agencies' practice of “packaging” a combination of services by writers, directors, actors and producers for a single film or television project, when offering that project to a studio or network, is prevalent and has enhanced their gatekeeping role.

United Talent Agency

When major talent agencies appear in the fact patterns of idea theft and copyright infringement claims, it's usually to establish how the plaintiff's property got into the hands of an agency client, such as the producer or writer of the infringing production. But in the pending case Jordan-Benel v. Universal City Studios, 14-05577 (C.D. Calif.), United Talent Agency (UTA), which is one of the elite, was named not only as a conduit but also as a defendant, accused of breaching an implied-in-fact contract with the plaintiff writer, as well as contributory copyright infringement of the plaintiff's screenplay, which UTA had rejected. Even while motions to dismiss by the defendants are pending (oral arguments were heard on May 17), these legal positions in the litigation deserve attention.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

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 Image

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 Image

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? Image

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.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

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?