Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Strategies for Using the IFTA Arbitration Process
More film productions have become international affairs, with shooting in faraway exotic locations, post-production in still other foreign countries, production funding from international sources, and sales in both foreign and domestic markets. The question then is how best to resolve disputes arising among the vast cast of characters in an efficient and cost-effective manner.
Enter the Los Angeles-based Independent Film and Television Alliance (IFTA; www.ifta-online.org) stage right. The IFTA, formerly known as the American Film Marketing Association, has provided an arbitration forum for domestic and international film and television disputes for years. While IFTA is generally used to address contractual disputes involving the financing, production, distribution and marketing of film and TV projects, the reach of arbitration clauses in the film industry may be much broader than anticipated. IFTA arbitrations can result in quick and inexpensive dispute resolution, but there are pitfalls for the unwary. As such, parties need to be careful both in drafting arbitration clauses, and in spelling out which disputes will or will not be subject to arbitration. Parties also need to anticipate issues in establishing personal jurisdiction over all interested parties, the nature and extent of discovery, the types of disputes to be fast-tracked, and how to exercise control over obstreperous parties and their counsel.
This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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
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 DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability
This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.