If a TV network makes a non-recourse loan to a production company to produce a TV series, could the production company nevertheless be required to pay back the loan? Assume that the agreement with the network provides for a license fee to the production company as well as a loan for production costs that exceed the license fee, and that the loan will be repaid only from the series' net profits. What happens if the series is never syndicated and thus earns no net profits?
August 26, 2003Stan SoocherRecently filed cases in entertainment law, straight from the steps of the Los Angeles Superior Court.
August 26, 2003ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Highlights of the latest franchising news from around the country.
August 26, 2003ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |The Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. Sec. 204) provides that '[a] transfer of copyright ownership, other than by operation of law, is not valid unless an instrument of conveyance, or a note or memorandum of the transfer, is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed or such owner's duly authorized agent.' A copyright infringement defendant may argue that it made use of a plaintiff's work pursuant to a grant of rights or license from the plaintiff. Where a license is written, the consent defense is relatively straightforward, and frequently turns on whether or not the defendant acted in accordance with the terms and scope of the license at issue. Where no writing exists, however, a plaintiff can more readily challenge such consent and force the defendant to face the writing hurdle imposed by Sec. 204.
August 26, 2003Christine Lepera and Christopher T. BavitzHighlights of the latest franchising cases from around the country.
August 26, 2003Susan H. Morton and David W. OppenheimThe Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate Division, has decided that to toll the statute of limitations of the California Talent Agencies Act, an 'action' must be filed with the state labor commissioner, rather than state court, within one year of the alleged Act violation. Greenfield v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, B159313 (Feb. 27).
August 26, 2003ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |The entertainment industry, based on building brand-name content and entities, has a long history of disputes over trademarks. Yet it may be unclear to a court how a defendant in a trademark infringement action intends to use a fair-use defense.
August 26, 2003Stan SoocherThe Court of Appeals of Tennessee, at Nashville, has decided that the Statute of Frauds barred record executives from enforcing unsigned two- and three-year contracts for them to operate a proposed but canceled country music label. Shedd v. Gaylord Entertainment Co., M2002-00258-COA-R3-CV. The statute voided the contracts because they couldn't be performed within one year, the court noted.
August 25, 2003ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
This button clears the current text from the Search Input field. Submit your search query.