Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Bit Parts

By Stan Soocher
February 01, 2021
|

Promotional Use of Supermodel's Appearance in Reality TV Show Didn't Violate Lanham Act

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a lower court ruling that the defendants' use of supermodel Janice Dickinson's personal appearance in the reality TV series Shahs of Sunset, to promote the show, didn't violate Dickinson's rights under the federal Lanham Act. Dickinson v. Ryan Seacrest Enterprises Inc., 19-55415. Dickinson, who claimed she hadn't signed a participant release, alleged: "Defendants have and continue to falsely represent that the Series is a documentary program rather than a scripted or fictional series, when in fact the Series is largely or entirely scripted. The group did so to market, advertise, and promote the Series by improperly trading off the goodwill, celebrity, and fame of Plaintiff, without paying any fee." Dickinson charged the defendants "agreed and conspired to script an episode of the Series … to include a false controversy in which they would make it appear that Plaintiff intentionally stole or bullied her way into wearing an outfit that had supposedly been previously selected for Golnesa Gharachedaghi (Gharachedaghi), a lead character on the Series." The U.S. District Court for the District of California found "the use of Plaintiff's name and likeness are artistically relevant to the Episode." In its affirmance, the Ninth Circuit noted in part: "Dickinson did not allege that the Shahs episode or the promotional materials for that episode contained an explicit representation that Dickinson was an endorser or sponsor of the series. Rather, Dickinson alleged only that she made an appearance on the show. … Thus, Dickinson failed to allege that Appellees' use of the mark is explicitly misleading as to source or sponsorship.

*****

|

Taylor Swift Shakes Off Fifth Copyright Infringement Lawsuit by Jesse Graham

The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California dismissed the fifth lawsuit songwriter Jesse Graham has filed alleging Taylor Swift's hit song "Shake It Off" infringed on Graham's composition "Haters Gone Hate." Graham v. Swift, CV-20-7000. Central District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald granted the Swift defendants' motion to dismiss Graham's latest suit without leave to amend. The first four lawsuits also were dismissed. (Graham's fourth complaint is on appeal to the Ninth Circuit.) In a straight-forward ruling, District Judge Fitzgerald noted: "The Court determines that this action — which is premised on the same alleged infringing conduct as alleged in Graham I—IV — is barred by the doctrine of res judicata," adding "Here, Plaintiff does not dispute that Graham I-V assert the same claim, namely that lyrics in the song Shake It Off allegedly infringe upon his copyright in the song Haters gone Hate." For res judicata purposes, the district judge further found that "privity exists because Plaintiff has named all Defendants in his previous lawsuits." But the court declined to grant the Swift defendants' motion to designate Graham as a "vexatious litigant" and to "impose a pre-filing order on Plaintiff requiring him to obtain court approval before attempting to revive his defunct copyright infringement claim or filing any new actions against Defendants arising under the Copyright Act." Instead, District Judge Fitzgerald said, "less restrictive options, such as monetary sanctions, may adequately protect judicial and litigant resources." The court gave Graham 30 days to explain "why sanctions should not be imposed, despite Plaintiff's repeated litigation misconduct."

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
How Secure Is the AI System Your Law Firm Is Using? Image

In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.

Fifth Circuit Rejects Majority 'Independent Economic Value' Test for Infringement Damages Image

Most of the federal circuit courts that have addressed what qualifies either as a "compilation" or as a single creative work apply an "independent economic value" analysis that looks at the market worth of the single creation as of the time when an infringement occurs. But in a recent ruling of first impression, the Fifth Circuit rejected the "independent economic value" test in determining which individual sound recordings are eligible for their own statutory awards and which are part of compilation.

The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies Image

Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.

AI Governance In Practice Image

Regardless of how a company proceeds with identifying AI governance challenges, and folds appropriate mitigation solution into a risk management framework, it is critical to begin with an AI governance program.

Authentic Communications Today Increase Success for Value-Driven Clients Image

As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.