Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Fight Stream Distributor Can Pursue Claim Against TN Grill
In a matter of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit sided with a third-party sporting events distributor by finding the distributor has standing to sue a Kingsport, TN, bar under the U.S. Copyright Act for livestreaming a 2017 boxing match between Floyd Mayweather and Conor McGregor without the proper licensing. Joe Hand Promotions Inc. v. Griffith, 21-6088 (6th Cir. 2022).
There's no dispute that CJ's Bar & Grill used a $99 personal Showtime license, rather than pay thousands of dollars for a commercial license, to stream the much-anticipated match between the famous boxer Mayweather and McGregor, a popular mixed martial arts fighter, on Aug. 26, 2017. CJ's owner and staff advertised the event and had a $6 coverage charge. Streaming the fight from a personal device, bar staff allegedly used an HDMI cable to stream the match to the bar's televisions, according to the Sixth Circuit's opinion. However, the parties dispute whether a post-fight copyright agreement between the fight's producer Showtime and the plaintiff in the present matter, Joe Hand Promotions (JHP), gave JHP the right to sue later for copyright infringement.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance 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.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.