Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Personal Jurisdiction Roundup
The issue of whether a court has personal jurisdiction over a party in an entertainment industry lawsuit is determined, as in other types of litigation, on a state-by-state basis, subject to whether this jurisdiction meets due process. The case outcomes vary.
For example, in a music sampling litigation alleging misappropriation and unjust enrichment, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois ruled this summer that distribution activity by an affiliate of defendant UMG Recordings, part of the world's largest music company, didn't create a “substantial connection” between UMG and Illinois for purposes of specific personal jurisdiction (i.e., that arising out of the facts in the case). The district court was satisfied by a UMG affidavit that “avers that UMG and UMGCS [distributor UMG Commercial Services] have the same corporate parent, but they operate separately from each other ' in particular, UMG neither owns nor controls UMGCS.” The court added that plaintiff Syl Johnson “offers no evidence of geographically-focused targeting that could subject UMG to personal jurisdiction on the basis of its alleged online sales.” Johnson v. Barrier, 15-CV-03928.
By contrast, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee ruled in July that it had specific personal jurisdiction over the company that releases online albums of musical performances from the now-defunct Bottom Line nightclub in New York City. See, Ian v. Bottom Line Record Co., 3:16-cv-00187. Tennessee-based artist Janis Ian filed a copyright infringement and right of publicity suit over the alleged unauthorized online release of some of her Bottom Line performances. The district court found: “The allegations that Bottom Line maintains a website where it can sell the allegedly-infringing material to residents of Tennessee is likely insufficient, by itself, for the Court to exercise personal jurisdiction over Bottom Line without allegations that residents of Tennessee have actually bought the allegedly-infringing material. ' However, the running of the website coupled with Bottom Line's attorneys negotiating and executing a contract via telephone calls, emails, and letters to Ian and her attorneys in Tennessee, is sufficient activity toward Tennessee to constitute purposeful availment.”
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.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.