Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search


Interpreting Court's 'Grokster' Ruling In Light of 'Napster' Case Precedent
August 25, 2003
The recent ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California upholding the distribution of decentralized peer-to-peer file-sharing software has made the entertainment industry's legal battle to eliminate the free exchange of content over the Internet seem even more insurmountable. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd., 01-08541. While industry executives tout a silver lining in District Judge Stephen V. Wilson's finding that consumers commit direct copyright infringement by using such technology, this nevertheless is the first major ruling against the entertainment business on the file-sharing issue. The odds on the entertainment industry prevailing on appeal are tight because the district court relied primarily on distinguishing the Ninth Circuit's holding in A & M Records Inc. v. Napster Inc. But a close look at Grokster provides some useful ideas for the entertainment industry to consider in its fight.
Bit Parts
August 25, 2003
Recent developments in entertainment law.
TVT vs. Def Jam Provides Tips On Evidence Use
August 25, 2003
On March 21, a Manhattan federal jury ruled that the Island Def Jam Music Group (IDJ) committed breach of contract, copyright infringement and fraud over TVT Records plans to release an album by hip-hop producer Irv Gotti featuring Ja Rule and his group Cash Murda Click (CMC). (TVT alleged that IDJ wrongfully prevented Gotti from delivering a CMC album for a November 2002 release date.
Courthouse Steps
August 25, 2003
Recently filed cases in entertainment law, straight from the steps of the Los Angeles Superior Court.
Clause & Effect
August 25, 2003
Parties who buy rights to produce films often sell those rights to third parties. Such assignments raise the issue of whether the third-party buyer must meet the contractual obligations that the original rights buyer owed the original rights seller.
Cameo Clips
August 25, 2003
Recent cases in entertainment law.
Decision of Note: <B>Defamation Claim Reinstated Over 'Hardball' Film</B>
August 25, 2003
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has reinstated a lawsuit alleging that a youth-baseball coach may have been defamed by the movie 'Hardball.'
Obtaining Royalty Settlement-Talk Documents In Litigation Over Loss of Legal Client
August 25, 2003
In an industry of ever-changing loyalties, it's not unusual for attorneys to be concerned about keeping their entertainment clients. In some instances, lawyers may lose clients to competitors. If one lawyer sues another lawyer over such a loss, a key issue will likely be what correspondence the original lawyer can obtain in the lawsuit against the new lawyer.
Recent Developments from Around the States
August 25, 2003
National cases of interest to you and your practice.
National Litigation Hotline
August 25, 2003
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
    This 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 In
    The 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 ›
  • The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
    UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?
    Read More ›
  • The Stranger to the Deed Rule
    In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.
    Read More ›