Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Intermediate Date Used for Prejudgment Interest in Digital Downloads Fees Suit
A magistrate for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York adopted an intermediate date for determining prejudgment interest for breach of a digital music distribution contract. Orchard Enterprises NY Inc. v. Megabop Records Ltd., 09-9607. Orchard Enterprises had obtained a default judgment in a suit it filed against the U.K.-based Megabop for payment of $175,039.69 that Megabop allegedly owed Orchard for digital download sales of sound recordings. Magistrate Gabriel W. Gorenstein initially noted: “The Second Circuit [in which the Southern District of New York resides] has held that an inquest into damages may be held on the basis of documentary evidence alone, 'as long as [the court has] ensured that there was a basis for the damages specified in [the] default judgment.' ' Orchard Enterprises' submissions include an affidavit and attached documentary evidence. Because these submissions provide a basis for an award of damages, no hearing is required.” In Orchard's request for the nine percent pre-judgment interest allowed under New York law, Magistrate Gorenstein found: “Because the record is not clear as to when Megabop paid Orchard Enterprises $20,000 [of a total $195,039.69 owed], it cannot be determined when Orchard Enterprises began to incur damages from each individual invoice [Orchard submitted to Megabop]. Thus, the Court will compute prejudgment interest upon all of the damages from a single reasonable intermediate date. Orchard Enterprises has proposed [Dec.] 31, 2007 as such a date, as that is the date 'when approximately half of the amount claimed had already been invoiced.' Megabop has not challenged plaintiff's proposal of [Dec.] 31, 2007. Accordingly, we will accept that date as reasonable.” However, the magistrate denied Orchard's request for attorney fees and costs by noting that “Orchard Enterprises provides no admissible evidence to support its claim for these categories.”
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.
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.
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.
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 real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.