LJN Newsletters

An actress who played a leading role in the film 'Hairspray' may owe her former managers commission fees for landing her the role, a Long Island, NY judge has ruled.

A look at recent rulings of importance.

The federal 'Orphan Works' legislation (S2913 and HR5889) creates an entirely new law favoring the 'opt in' fundamentalists who prefer as many copyright formalities as possible, thereby increasing the likelihood that works will fall ' intentionally or unintentionally ' into the public domain. Some have characterized the import of the Orphan Works legislation as creating a new rateless compulsory license, or at a minimum a 'safe harbor' for libraries (such as the Library of Congress), museums, public broadcasters and universities, as well as commercial entities.

In-depth analysis of recent rulings.

Errors-and-omissions insurance (also known as 'E&O' or producers liability insurance) is an inevitable part of every film and TV producer's life. It is required for the sale and distribution of virtually all film productions and television shows in North America ' and the requirement is becoming global. The goal of the article is to allow production counsel to spot the issues and to develop a sense of what is risky or not in the course of bringing a film or television production to fruition.

A recent Ninth Circuit decision vacating a conviction because the trial judge failed to recuse himself, and a pending recusal application by convicted executive Jamie Olis, remind us that sometimes defendants try to improve their judicial lot through recusal, though with little hope for success.

Everything contained in this issue, in an easy-to-read format.

In its June 3, 2008, decision in Pultz v. Economakis, the New York State Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that there is no limit on the number of rent-stabilized units an owner can attempt to recover for owner occupancy. The ruling was a major victory for rent stabilized landlords, and a sharp rebuke to tenant advocates who claimed that multiple recovery for owner occupancy violated the letter and spirit of the Rent Stabilization Law. Indeed, the case continues a recent trend of favorable Court of Appeals decisions for landlords.