Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A New Yorker who settled a copyright lawsuit against several news outlets, including Time Inc., Breitbart News Network, Vox and Yahoo — over a photo he took of star quarterback Tom Brady and Boston Celtics manager Danny Ainge — has struck again. This time he's suing a radio station owner in Florida federal courts.
It's a case that could test the boundaries of an emerging area of copyright law, raising major questions about how media companies incorporate social media posts into online stories.
Plaintiff Justin Goldman uploaded the picture to Snapchat on July 2, 2016, but within hours it went viral, popping up on Reddit, then Twitter. From there, news outlets reported on speculation that Brady was helping recruit basketball player Kevin Durant to the Celtics. But when those news reports included the image via tweets embedded within online stories, Goldman sued claiming he'd never publicly released the photo or given the outlets permission to use it.
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?