Controversy from Talent Lawyer's Article on JAMS

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.

11 minute readNovember 30, 2015 at 11:00 PM
By
Patience Haggin
Controversy from Talent Lawyer's Article on JAMS

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

This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters

  • 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
Subscribe Now

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

Landlord & Tenant Law

Letter Agreement Between Landlord and Tenant Did Not Extinguish GuarantyTreble Damage Award Upheld; Landlord Failed to Establish Overcharge Was Not WillfulDenying Access to Landlord Constituted Breach Entitling Landlord to PossessionTenant Entitled to Yellowstone Injunction With Respect to Taxes and Sewer Charges

March 01, 2026

New York’s New AI Laws for Posthumous Right of Publicity and for Advertising Transparency

New York is one of the first states to adopt laws to regulate artificial intelligence use in advertising and to strengthen post-mortem publicity rights regarding AI-generated replicas and “synthetic performers.” Given the state’s role as a bellwether for consumer-protection and advertising regulation, these new laws, combined with the state’s broader AI legislative framework, represent a shift toward transparency, consent and accountability.

March 01, 2026

The Power of One: How Leading Firms Are Rethinking Revenue Operations

The firms leading right now chose to ask what would become possible if they managed the entire revenue lifecycle — from invoice generation to cash receipt — in one place, and what AI could actually accomplish with complete data instead of partial feeds. That is the Power of One.

March 01, 2026

Using AI Without Waiving Privilege: Lessons from United States v. Heppner

A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), United States v. Heppner, has generated outsized commentary suggesting that the use of generative AI tools may jeopardize attorney-client privilege. A closer reading shows something far less dramatic.

March 01, 2026