Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
Public relations or not. If you are a reader of The New York Times, you may have noticed that when journalists quote an attorney for a particular piece, it seems that the quote comes from an expert in a firm outside of New York. What's going on? I will admit that for many years New York law firms shied away from being quoted at all, feeling perhaps that they were above it all and that their clients, for the most part high profile Fortune 500 corporations and large banking institutions would scowl at their outside counsel garnering attention. Now it seems that these firms have been relegated to the occasional quote while the regional/national firms have embraced the media and are truly "out there.
Features
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia decided that a contestant on the TV game show "Wheel of Fortune" was barred by a release he signed from pursuing a negligent conduct claim against the show's producer over alleged injuries he sustained during taping. But the court also ruled that the contestant could proceed with his claims of reckless or intentional conduct.
The Supreme Court of South Carolina ruled that the president of the Nevada-based Legends In Concert owed no fiduciary duty to a corporation formed by an entrepreneur to raise the capital needed to produce a Legends musical in Myrtle Beach.
Recently filed cases in entertainment law, straight from the steps of the Los Angeles Superior Court.
Features
This occasional column will cover court rulings on sports-related issues of interest to the entertainment industry.
WASHINGTON, DC ' The controversy over whether developers and distributors of peer-to-peer file-sharing software should be found liable for contributory and vicarious copyright infringement has been described as the most important copyright case for the entertainment industry in two decades ' or as an issue that Congress ultimately will decide. (That the underlying unlicensed downloading and uploading of entertainment content by consumers is direct infringement has already been made clear by courts.) To this observer in the court's press section, questioning by the U.S. Supreme Court justices during the recent oral arguments in what is known as the <i>Grokster</i> case demonstrated no clear consensus among the justices.
