Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Search


<b><i>Clause & Effect</b></i>Issues in Drafting Work-for-Hire Agreements
The common use of content created by freelance talent has made the signing of work-for-hire agreements a common requirement of entertainment production companies. But just how specific must the contract language be to make the work-for-hire provision binding on the content creator?
Securitization May Work Beyond Music Royalty Income Stream
A securitization is a process whereby an individual or entity pools the right to future payments that it is owed, and sells this right as a security. The first individual to capitalize on the concept of securitization of intellectual property (IP) assets was musician David Bowie. He issued a bond offering backed by his copyright royalties in 25 of his albums comprising approximately 250 songs. Although industry experts expected a flood of music rights securitizations following the launch of the "Bowie Bonds" in 1997, this did not come to pass. However, securitization as a concept is not limited to just music copyright royalties. Any IP right with a proven revenue stream could be used as the underlying asset in a securitization. Therefore, there is a huge potential for extending the concept of IP securitizations to other areas of the entertainment industry.
Bit Parts
Recent developments in entertainment law.
Courthouse Steps
Recently filed cases in entertainment law, straight from the steps of the Los Angeles Superior Court.
Recent Developments from Around the States
A look at the latest cases from around the states.
National Litigation Hotline
Recent cases of importance to your practice.
Direct Evidence Not Needed in Mixed-Motive Cases
The Supreme Court ended its last term holding that direct evidence of discrimination is not necessary in a Title VII mixed-motive case. <i>Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa</i>, 123 S. Ct. 2148 (2003) brings an end to an appellate court split regarding evidentiary burdens that began with the Court's plurality decision in <i>Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins</i>, 490 U.S. 228 (1989).
Employee Won't Sign a Non-Compete: Grounds for Dismissal?
A former employee may proceed with whistle-blowing and claims of wrongful discharge against an employer who fired her for refusing to sign a non-compete agreement. On April 16, 2003, the New Jersey Appellate Division (the Court) so ruled in <i>Maw v. Advanced Clinical Communications, Inc. (ACCI)</i>, 359 N.J. Super. 420 (App. Div. 2003).
Managing E-commerce Partnerships
Q: What do you risk getting when you mix commerce with the Internet?<br>A: A host of possible legal issues.<BR>Proper planning, however, will reduce the legal risk associated with e-commerce pacts and make for a less bumpy ride should the partners decide down the road that they want to go their separate ways.
e-Commerce Docket Sheet
Recent developments in e-commerce law and the industry.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Coverage Issues Stemming from Dry Cleaner Contamination Suits
    In recent years, there has been a growing number of dry cleaners claiming to be "organic," "green," or "eco-friendly." While that may be true with respect to some, many dry cleaners continue to use a cleaning method involving the use of a solvent called perchloroethylene, commonly known as perc. And, there seems to be an increasing number of lawsuits stemming from environmental problems associated with historic dry cleaning operations utilizing this chemical.
    Read More ›
  • The Flight to Quality and Workplace Experience
    That the pace of change is "accelerating" is surely an understatement. What seemed almost a near certainty a year ago — that law firms would fully and permanently embrace work-from-home — is experiencing a seeming reversal. While many firms have, in fact, embraced hybrid operations, the meaning of hybrid has evolved from "office optional," to an average required 2 days a week, to now many firms coming out with four-day work week mandates — this time, with teeth.
    Read More ›
  • AI or Not To AI: Observations from Legalweek NY 2023
    This year at Legalweek, there was little doubt on what the annual takeaway topic would be. As much as I tried to avoid it for fear of beating the proverbial dead horse, it was impossible not to talk about generative AI, ChatGPT, and all that goes with it. Some fascinating discussions were had and many aspects of AI were uncovered.
    Read More ›
  • The Powerful Impact of The Non-Foreclosure Notice of Pendency
    RPAPL ' 1331 and RPAPL ' 1403 Notices of Pendency are requisite elements for foreclosing a mortgage. <i>See, Chiarelli v. Kotsifos</i>, 5 A.D.3d 345 (a notice of pendency is a prerequisite to obtaining a judgment in a mortgage foreclosure action); <i>Campbell v. Smith</i>, 309 A.D.2d 581, 582 (a notice of pendency is required in a foreclosure action under RPAPL Article 13). In contrast, an ex parte CPLR Article 65 Notice of Pendency (the "Notice") is not required but it is a significant tool in an action claiming title to, or an interest in or the use or enjoyment of, another's land. The filer does not have to make a meritorious showing or post a bond. Article 65 provides mechanisms for the defendant-owner to vacate the Notice that caused an unilaterally imposed restraint on its realty. But, recent case law establishes the near futility of such efforts if the plaintiff has satisfied the minimal statutory requisites for filing the Notice.
    Read More ›