Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A man claiming to have been cheated out of credit for writing a song that was eventually recorded by R&B star Usher won a more than $40 million judgment in a combined verdict and settlement against two men he co-wrote the song with. The award, which included a $27 million verdict and a $17.35 million stipulated judgment that was part of a broader settlement, was entered in a Philadelphia state court last month. Marino v. Barton, 160500051((Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas Phila.).
According to court records, a jury awarded plaintiff Daniel Marino $6.75 million in compensatory damages and $20.25 million in punitive damages against William Guice, a co-writer defendant, who had defaulted in the case. Two days before the verdict was handed down, Marino had entered into a settlement that included a $17.35 million judgment against Destro Music Productions, as well as a third of the ownership rights of the disputed song, according to a transcript of the proceedings.
Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Angelo Foglietta oversaw the trial.
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?