Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Disney Enterprises has been handed a setback in an ill-conceived lawsuit: Going after people who dress up as Disney-owned characters like Elsa from Frozen or Chewbacca from Star Wars to perform at children's birthday parties.
Federal District Judge George Daniels of the Southern District of New York tossed claims of trademark infringement, unfair competition and false designation of origin brought by Disney and its affiliates Marvel Characters and Lucasfilm against Characters for Hire (CFH). However, in his summary judgment decision District Judge Daniels kept alive Disney's trademark dilution and copyright infringement allegations.
New York-based Characters for Hire provides “costumed entertainment” for birthday parties and corporate events in major cities across the country. The characters aren't outright copycats. As the company states on its website: “It is not our intention to violate any copyright laws. The characters that we offer are NOT name brand copyrighted characters. … Any resemblance to nationally known copyrighted characters is strictly coincidental.”
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
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.
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.
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.
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?