Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
CA Federal Judge Agrees TV Streaming Co. Qualifies for Compulsory License
Aereo Inc.'s copyright dispute with the major television broadcasters didn't pan out as the now-bankrupt streaming service had hoped. But after Aereo lost at the U.S. Supreme Court, competitor FilmOn X continued to fight. Now, a Los Angeles federal judge has moved FilmOn closer to winning its battle with broadcasters.
Like Aereo, FilmOn relies on banks of small antennae to retransmit television broadcasts over the Internet. Both companies initially maintained that the technology didn't amount to copyright infringement because they were simply allowing users to access on their computers content that was freely available to anyone with a TV and a digital rabbit ear antenna.
Federal District Judge Kevin Wu has now sided with FilmOn in its dispute with Fox Broadcasting, NBCUniversal Media, American Broadcasting Companies and CBS Broadcasting. The Central District of California judge agreed with FilmOn's lawyers from Baker Marquart that the streaming service was eligible for a compulsory copyright license to use the networks' content. But acknowledging the novelty of the issue, District Judge Wu kept in place a preliminary injunction against FilmOn, and allowed the broadcasters to take an interlocutory appeal. Fox Television Stations Inc. v FilmOn X LLC, 12-6921.
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
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?