Features

Divided Over Damages: Courts Split On Whether Failure to Mark Precludes All, or Only Some, Pre-Suit Damages
Only a few district courts have addressed the failure to mark in recent years — but they’ve reached directly opposing conclusions. This article analyzes the conflicting authorities and their reasoning, and it provides guidance to litigants on best practices given the conflict between district courts.
Features

Second Circuit Ruling on Copyright Fair Use Defense and Infringement Lawsuit Default Judgments
In copyright litigation, an infringement defendant may claim fair use as an affirmative defense. But the Second Circuit recently ruled that a district court, on its own initiative, could raise a fair use defense for a defendant that hadn’t appeared in the case.
Features

The World of the New Child Performers: Kidfluencers and Social Media Labor Laws
Entertainment and media counsel take note: Among social media influencers, the cool kids on the block are now, well, kids. In today’s digital landscape, children have emerged as a significant force in the world of social media content creation. Often referred to as “kidfluencers,” these youngsters are the subject of creative content ranging from toy reviews to family vlogs, garnering millions of followers and lucrative brand partnerships. Notable kidfluencers have turned childhood activities into multimillion-dollar enterprises.
Features

DraftKings Loses Bid for Interlocutory Appeal in Lawsuit Over Use of MLB Players’ NILs
A federal judge in Pennsylvania rejected popular sports-betting platform DraftKings’ attempts to certify questions to the appellate court in a name, image and likeness (NIL) dispute with MLB Players Inc.
Columns & Departments

Fresh Filings
Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.
Columns & Departments

Players On the Move
A look at moves among attorneys, law firms, companies and other players in entertainment law.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- The Article 8 Opt InThe 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.Read More ›
- Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult CoinWith 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.Read More ›
- Online Interviewing for Use in Lanham Act LitigationInternet interviewing will undoubtedly become the norm over the next decade. Being familiar with the ways to enhance its reliability and validity will be necessary to create scientifically valid, controlled, and reliable studies that can be used in Lanham Act litigation.Read More ›
- Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright LawsThis 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.Read More ›
- Foreseeability as a Bar to Proof of Patent InfringementThe doctrine of equivalents is a rule of equity adopted more than 150 years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. Prosecution history estoppel is a rule of equity that controls access to the doctrine. In May 2002, the Court was called upon to revisit the doctrine and the estoppel rule in <i>Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. Ltd.</i> Ultimately the Court reaffirmed the doctrine and expanded the estoppel rule, but not without inciting heated debate over the Court's rationale — especially since it included a new and controversial foreseeability test in its analysis for estoppel.Read More ›