We found 2,562 results for "Entertainment Law & Finance"...
Of Mice and Men
January 03, 2006
On Aug. 9, 2005, the Delaware Court of Chancery issued its decision in In re The Walt Disney Co. Derivative Litigation, 2005 WL 2056651 (Del. Ch. Aug. 9, 2005), a case that had drawn intense media attention to a relationship that definitely had gone awry despite the best laid schemes of The Walt Disney Company and its former President, Michael Ovitz. (The case currently is on appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court.) As the court noted, the case became something of a "public spectacle ... commencing as it did with the spectacular hiring of one of the entertainment industry's best known personalities to help run one of its iconic businesses, and ending with a spectacular failure of that union, with breathtaking amounts of severance pay the consequence." The severance package amounted to approximately $140 million in cash and vested stock options, which was paid to Ovitz upon the termination of his employment under a "no-fault" termination provision in his employment agreement. (The court found that the $140 million severance payment, while "breathtaking," was not economically material to Disney.) Now that the dust has settled and that breathtaking $140,000,000 severance payment is history, the question is: what has been learned?
A 'TIP' for Responding to Trademark Infringement
December 05, 2005
If tsunamis, hurricanes and terrorist strikes have taught us anything, it is that emergency preparedness is vital to minimizing damage and facilitating recovery. Trademark infringement is no different. Trademark infringement preparedness can help lay the groundwork for an effective response by facilitating communication, reducing delay, ensuring comprehensive gathering of key response items, allowing for productive use of human resources, and providing for efficient allocation of monetary resources.
Can The Grokster Settlement Close Pandora's Box?
November 30, 2005
Does Grokster's throwing in the towel mean the end of P2Ps as we have come to know them? Or is merely smoke and mirrors?
Foreign Filming Creates Challenges For Lawyers
November 29, 2005
As Hollywood filmmakers increasingly shift production abroad, they're creating myriad opportunities for U.S. entertainment lawyers. While the so-called "runaway" productions are bleeding thousands of U.S. industry jobs, the migration is a boon for entertainment-law practices that thrive on international legal complexities.
Courthouse Steps
November 29, 2005
Recently filed cases in entertainment law, straight from the steps of the Los Angeles Superior Court.
Acquiring Music for a "Play with Music
November 29, 2005
Acquiring the rights to use music in a play with music can best be described as a journey with Alice through Wonderland. It usually isn't an easy chore.
Second Circuit Rules in Record Distribution Case
November 29, 2005
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld cancellation of the distribution by Artemis Records of a cover recording of "The Ketchup Song (Heh Hah)" for which 24/7 Records failed to obtain a compulsory license for the musical composition. But the appeals court allowed 24/7 to proceed with claims of wrongful termination of 24/7's overall distribution contract with Artemis and that Artemis' distributor Sony Music, which distributed an earlier internationally successful recording of "The Ketchup Song," had tortiously interfered with the 24/7-Artemis agreement.
'Buy/Burn/Return' May Violate Copyright Law
November 29, 2005
Buy It, Burn It, Return It" is the policy recently adopted by a record chain in New Jersey. A radio ad for another retail store states: "You find it, you buy it, you burn it. What, I mean, not really burn it. You know. Put it in your iPod or MP3. And then sell it back. That's right: we'll buy your CDs back." The retailer can then sell the recording as used, over and over again, buying it back for less than the selling price and profiting perhaps even more than by selling it only one time. <br>The problem with these "new" record-retail tactics is that they clearly violate the rights of sound-recording and musical-composition copyright owners to control the rental distribution of their works.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright LawsThis 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.Read More ›
- The Article 8 Opt InThe 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.Read More ›
- Removing Restrictive Covenants In New YorkIn 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?Read More ›
- Warehouse Liability: Know Before You Stow!As consumers continue to shift purchasing and consumption habits in the aftermath of the pandemic, manufacturers are increasingly reliant on third-party logistics and warehousing to ensure their products timely reach the market.Read More ›