Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Arbitration provider JAMS is staying neutral, sort of, on an entertainment litigator's claim that it favors big studios in arbitrations and mediations. The claim, made by Bird Marella partner Ronald Nessim in a law review this summer, is essentially that JAMS has a lock on studio business, with the overwhelming majority of studio contracts reviewed by Nessim naming JAMS as the dispute resolution provider. See, “Mandatory Arbitration Provisions Involving Talent and Studios and Proposed Areas for Improvement,” UCLA Entertainment Law Review, Vol. 22, Issue 2 (2015).
That gives JAMS neutrals an incentive to favor the studios ' a repeat-player bias. “I have a lot of respect for JAMS and JAMS arbitrators,” Nessim, who typically represents talent in disputes, said recently. “They're no different than anybody else in the world. They make money if people designate them.”
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
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.