Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Two federal courts have differently interpreted royalty clauses related to the digital sales of sound recordings. In a suit by F.B.T. Productions ' to which rapper Eminem signed in the 1990s ' the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided that the production company had the unambiguous right, under F.B.T.'s 1998 and 2004 agreements with Aftermath Records, to 50% of the net income received from third-party exploitations of permanent downloads and mastertones. F.B.T. Productions LLC v. Aftermath Records, 09-55817. Aftermath argued that the lower contract rate of 12% to 20% applied instead, for Eminem records sold by Aftermath through “normal retail channels.” But the appeals court noted of the F.B.T./Aftermath agreements that, “'notwithstanding' the Records Sold provision, F.B.T. is to receive a 50% royalty on 'masters licensed by [Aftermath] ' to others for their manufacture and sale of records or for any other uses.' ' Aftermath did not dispute that it entered into agreements that permitted iTunes, cellular phone carriers, and other third parties to use its sound recordings to produce and sell permanent downloads and mastertones. Those agreements therefore qualify as licenses under Aftermath's own proposed construction of the term.”
The appeals further explained: “Under our case law interpreting and applying the Copyright Act, too, it is well settled that where a copyright owner transfers a copy of copyrighted material, retains title, limits the uses to which the material may be put, and is compensated periodically based on the transferee's exploitation of the material, the transaction is a license.”
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
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.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
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.
A common question that commercial landlords and tenants face is which of them is responsible for a repair to the subject premises. These disputes often center on whether the repair is "structural" or "nonstructural."