Columns & Departments
Players On the Move
A look at moves among attorneys, law firms, companies and other players in entertainment law.
Columns & Departments
Fresh Filings
Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.
Features
Anthropic’s Settlement With Authors May Be Potential Blueprint for Resolving AI Infringement Claims
A federal judge in the Northern District of California granted preliminary approval to a $1.5 billion settlement between Anthropic and a class of book authors who alleged that the artificial intelligence company used their copyrighted works to train its chatbot Claude without their consent. The settlement is the largest copyright settlement of all time, covering 482,460 works and paying authors slightly more than $3,000 per work infringed.
Features
Parameters of Legal Relationship Between Co-Lenders for Film Production
An “agreement between lenders” (ABL) to help co-fund a film production is a common vehicle for sharing financial risk. But what happens when a legal dispute arises between a film-production senior lender who has provided a larger loan amount than a junior lender who has loaned less?
Columns & Departments
Fresh Filings
Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.
Features
Lawyer Sues Amazon Prime Over Portrayal of Him In Movie
When The Burial, a film inspired by a real-life court case was released in theaters briefly before moving to Amazon Prime Video in 2023, the reviews were mostly positive. A few of those reviews singled out the performance of Mamoudou Athie as junior counsel Hal Dockins. The real-life Dockins, however, was not as happy with the portrayal of himself in the film. He is suing the producers over alleged unauthorized use of his name, image and likeness.
Features
How To Determine Duration of Royalty Contract That Doesn’t Contain Specific End Date
In 1997, Supertramp members Roger Hodgson and Rick Davies, the band’s main songwriters, agreed to share their songwriting and publishing income with the group’s three other members — John Helliwell, Robert Siebenberg and Douglas Thomson — and their personal manager David Margereson. But there was one key point missing in the participation memorandum: The agreement didn’t state how long it would remain in effect. It wasn’t until August 2025 that the issue was decided, by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Features
Discovery Block In Authors’ Direct Infringement Claim Against Mosaic AI Program
How are copyright holders to prove their works were used to train AI models if the details about the vast data sets used for such training are kept secret? That dilemma surfaced when a California federal judge recently dismissed a claim of direct infringement raised by a group of authors.
Columns & Departments
Players On the Move
A look at moves among attorneys, law firms, companies and other players in entertainment law.
Features
Copyright-Termination Case Complexities and Sixth Circuit’s Decision In “Que Sera Sera” Litigation
The Nashville federal court where the lawsuit was filed summarized the litigation as “concern[ing] the rights to a prolific composer’s music, a dizzying estate plan, and two descendants at odds over how to manage the royalties those compositions earn.”
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
- Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar InvestigationsThis 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.Read More ›
- The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year LaterThe 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.Read More ›
- Surveys in Patent Infringement Litigation: The Next FrontierMost experienced intellectual property attorneys understand the significant role surveys play in trademark infringement and other Lanham Act cases, but relatively few are likely to have considered the use of such research in patent infringement matters. That could soon change in light of the recent admission of a survey into evidence in <i>Applera Corporation, et al. v. MJ Research, Inc., et al.</i>, No. 3:98cv1201 (D. Conn. Aug. 26, 2005). The survey evidence, which showed that 96% of the defendant's customers used its products to perform a patented process, was admitted as evidence in support of a claim of inducement to infringe. The court admitted the survey into evidence over various objections by the defendant, who had argued that the inducement claim could not be proven without the survey.Read More ›
- The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance ProgramsThe 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.Read More ›
- In the SpotlightOn May 9, 2003, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts announced that Bayer Corporation, the pharmaceutical manufacturer, had been sentenced and ordered to pay a criminal fine of $5,590,800 stemming from its earlier plea of guilty to violating the Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act by failing to list with the FDA its drug product, Cipro, that was privately labeled for an HMO. Such listing is required under the federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act. The Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act, Pub. L. 100-293, enacted on April 22, 1988, as modified on August 26, 1992 by the Prescription Drug Amendments (PDA) Pub. L. 102-353, 106 Stat. 941, amended sections 301, 303, 503, and 801 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, codified at 21 U.S.C. '' 331, 333, 353, 381, to establish requirements for distributing prescription drug samples.Read More ›
