Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Angry Fed. Judge Throws Out Song Infringement Suit
A Miami company's decision to defend a small-potatoes copyright case all the way to trial paid off when the case was dismissed after a few hours — by an angry federal judge. Southern District of New York federal Judge Richard Sullivan found the plaintiffs' only trial witness, the principal of two companies that claimed Spanish Broadcasting System (SBS) willfully infringed copyrights by playing six songs on the radio, contradicted years of amended complaints by saying his companies didn't hold the copyrights. Latin American Music Co. v. Spanish Broadcasting System, 13-cv-1526. The plaintiffs' attorney also said the witness, Raul Bernard, had recordings of the songs being broadcast on the radio after previously telling the judge the recordings were missing.
“Nobody should think that you get to do what's gone on in this case and we all just walk away and shrug our shoulders,” District Judge Sullivan told Bernard and his New York attorney Kelly Talcott. This doesn't happen in federal court, people making statements that are directly contradicted by their attorneys and that constitute grave violations of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and potentially perjury. So this is really serious.”
Judge Sullivan ordered Talcott and the plaintiffs' previous attorney, Jose Torres, to prove they should not be sanctioned for perjury and failure to comply with discovery obligations and orders of the court.
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.