When Christopher S. Harrison first joined DMX Inc. in 2005 as vice president of business affairs, he says the new-employee paperwork required by the company was a good omen. He says he signed a waiver that he would not complain about offensive lyrics in the music playing in the office. "I knew I had made the right decision," says Harrison, now general counsel of DMX, an Austin, TX-based music provider to retailers, restaurants, hotels and other businesses. "We have music, different kinds of music, playing in pretty much everybody's office all the time," says Harrison, a fan of hip-hop and classic rock.
Former Rutgers University star quarterback Ryan Hart got another shot at suing video game company Electronic Arts Inc., which allegedly earned billions by exploiting his persona and that of other college football stars. A federal judge in the District of New Jersey recently dismissed Hart's case but gave him 20 days to file an amended complaint to beef up one of his claims: that Electronic Art, based in Redwood City, CA, infringed on his right of publicity.
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York dismissed a federal RICO claim that alleged the defendants took the basis for their TV program The Great American Road Trip from a TV show idea created by the plaintiffs.
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.
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 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.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
