The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the copyright infringement case brought by television networks and Hollywood studios against Cablevision over technology that allows viewers to record TV shows.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld a finding of contempt against associates, family employees and corporate successors-in-interest of music promoter Larry Marshak over use of the name of The Drifters vocal group. But the appeals court strengthened remedies that plaintiff Faye Treadwell, widow of former Drifters manager George Treadwell, had been awarded by the district court in the contempt proceeding.
Anyone following summer motion picture releases will note the seasonal prevalence of big budget sequels to successful films. In some instances, sequels are derived solely from the scripts of previously produced motion pictures (<i>e.g.</i>, <i>Terminator</i>, <i>Night at the Museum</i>). In other instances, they connect with books or book series that were made into one or more prior films (<i>e.g.</i>, <i>Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince</i>, <i>Angels & Demons</i>). Mindful of the vast rewards that can flow from these so-called "franchises" (<i>e.g.</i>, the James Bond franchise), Hollywood studios structure their agreements with book authors to maximize their chances of creating one.
It's not common that a franchise is embroiled in a dispute that has the potential to disrupt or force operational changes to the entire system. But when those situations arise, franchisors are faced with the unpleasant decision whether it's worth taking on the "bet-the-system" challenge.
Unless one is aware of the potential pitfalls, even so-called "iron-clad" indemnification clauses or insurance provisions in a franchise agreement can be all for naught. This article discusses the interplay between insurance, indemnification, and the default common-law rules, so that franchisors and franchisees can avoid those dangerous pitfalls.
The copyright for the original versions of Winnie the Pooh and Mickey Mouse have expired. Now, members of the public can create — and are busy creating — their own works based on these beloved characters. Suppose, though, we want to tell stories using Batman for which the copyright does not expire until 2035. We'll review five hypothetical works inspired by the original Batman comic and analyze them under fair use.
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.
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?
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.
