Features

How to Obtain Subpoenas for Identifying ISP Users
This article focuses on a recent federal court decision, to explain how the well-developed law provides plaintiffs asserting a wide range of claims with the ability to proceed while protecting ISPs and, correspondingly, how it ultimately means that defendants who otherwise could remain anonymous may have to defend themselves in court.
Features

Change In ADR Provider at Issue In Event-Ticketing Fees Litigation
A new antitrust complaint over ticketing fees has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against Live Nation Entertainment Inc. and Ticketmaster. The plaintiffs in the newly filed suit are challenging Ticketmaster's new arbitration agreement by claiming its protocols for mass arbitrations, laid out in the rules and procedures posted to its website, require "a novel and one-sided process that is tailored to disadvantage consumers."
Columns & Departments
Players on the Move
A look at moves among attorneys, law firms, companies and other players in entertainment law.
Columns & Departments
Bit Parts
Latest Decision in Band Name Dispute Among Original "Rascals" Members Second Circuit Upholds District Court's Interpretation of "Broadcasting" in Insurance Policy's Media Exclusion Clause
Features

California Appeals Court Rules on Anti-SLAPP Motion In Battle Over Dueling TV Show Proposals
State "anti-SLAPP" statutes offer a fertile avenue for motions to strike allegations in lawsuits filed over expressive content. These laws are aimed at allowing a defendant to file a motion to strike a "Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation," such as those based on public comments and content issued by a defendant. The most-recent significant anti-SLAPP court decision involving the entertainment industry was issued in December 2021 by the California Court of Appeal.
Features

How §365(n) Can Help Licensees When Licensors File for Bankruptcy
This article seeks to explain the scope of §365(n), then touches upon steps that intellectual property licensees can take to minimize the loss of the use of their licenses, such as those involving copyrights in entertainment content, in the event a licensor files for bankruptcy.
Features

Miramax's NFT Suit Over Pulp Fiction
The Miramax film and tv studio, and its lawyers at Proskauer Rose, shook up both the IP and blockchain communities recently when Miramax sued to block film director Quentin Tarantino from selling non-fungible tokens (NFTs) of memorabilia from his 1994 blockbuster movie Pulp Fiction.
Features

Challenges In Being a Pro Sports General Counsel
Being a general counsel for a professional sports team is a coveted gig, but it's also a job with unique challenges, potential ethical minefields and scandals lurking around the front office, field, stadium and elsewhere.
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
- The Article 8 Opt InThe 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.Read More ›
- Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult CoinWith 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.Read More ›
- Clause & EffectNet-Profit Rights/Movies Based on TV Shows<br>Insurance/Contract-Breach Exclusion<br>Insurance/Copyright-Infringement CoverageRead More ›
- Rights and Obligations In Patent LicensesThe owner of a commercially successful patent may have competing desires. On one hand, the patent owner wants to protect the patent and secure its maximum benefit; on the other hand, the patent owner wants to avoid enforcement litigation with competitors because it is expensive and puts the patent at risk.Read More ›
- Foreseeability as a Bar to Proof of Patent InfringementThe doctrine of equivalents is a rule of equity adopted more than 150 years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. Prosecution history estoppel is a rule of equity that controls access to the doctrine. In May 2002, the Court was called upon to revisit the doctrine and the estoppel rule in <i>Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. Ltd.</i> Ultimately the Court reaffirmed the doctrine and expanded the estoppel rule, but not without inciting heated debate over the Court's rationale — especially since it included a new and controversial foreseeability test in its analysis for estoppel.Read More ›