Episode 26 – Attack of the Little Trees!

podcast-logo

Play

Call us with your feedback:
(310) 243-6231

In this Episode:

  • PROTECT IP /SOPA
  • CROWD FUNDING BILL
  • Ghost Hunters – Cert Denied
  • Rob Zombie Class Action moves toward class certification
  • Viacom/ YouTube case sees extraordinary order
  • Grooveshark sued by UMG
  • Sound Recording Copyright Terminations begin
  • Who owns “La Dolce Vita”
  • Does Eastland records have a 50/50 chance in court?
  • Car Freshner v. Getty Images – attack of the little trees

GET CLE CREDIT for this episode.

Clio - Online Practice Management done right.Entertainment Law Update is brought to you by Clio, the best way to manage your practice online. Clio allows you to manage your matters, clients, time, bills, trust accounts and more all through a a secure, easy-to-use, web-based interface. For a free 30-day trial and 25% off your first 6 months of Clio, sign up at www.goclio.com and enter promotional code [ENTLAW]” Or, just visit http://entertainmentlawupdate.com/clio

Show Notes

Hosts:  

Gordon P. Firemark
Website:   http://firemark http://theatrelawyer.com,
Twitter: @gfiremark

Tamera Bennett

Website:   http://createprotect.com
Twitter: @tamerabennett

Guest:

Peter Kaufman of the Kaufman Entertainment Law Group in Los Angeles joins us in this episode.

Peter practices in the fields of film, television, music and intellectual property.  He is an Arbitrator for the Independent Film and Television Alliance,  and a member of the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences.   He is also a frequent speaker in the United States and abroad including USC’s School of Cinema Arts, CeBit – Germany, the Atlas Film and TV Finance Conference and the Los Angeles County Bar Association’s yearly symposia on entertainment law. Mr. Kaufman is the former chair of the Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association.

 Read Peter’s blog at http://dealfatigue.com, and follow him on twitter: @dealfatigue.


PENDING LEGISLATION

Protect IP Act and Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA):

Ars Technica, Proposed Law: http://static.arstechnica.net/2011/10/26/SOPA.pdf

Public Knowledge: http://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/what-warners-recklessness-says-about-sopa

Warner Bros. response: http://torrentfreak.com/warner-bros-admits-sending-hotfile-false-takedown-requests-111109/

Brief Summary of the Proposed Law

PROTECT IP Act (short for Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011)  was introduced on May 12, 2011 by Senator Patrick Leahy.  It is a rewriting of the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA).  The House version of the bill, the “Stop Online Piracy Act” (SOPA) was proposed on October 26, 2011.

The Bill(s):

  • Create a private cauise of action against sites that are “dedicated to the theft of U.S. Property”
  • Allows the DOJ  stop payments and advertising on such sites.
  • Bars search engines from linking to those sites, as well as ordering domain name services to de-list the sites.
  • Grants immunity to those who report such infringing sites

CAUTIONARY TALE:

Warner Bros. has admitted to abusing its DMCA takedown rights in another context… what’s to stop them and others like them from abusing this law’s mechanism  to take down entire sites?

CROWD FUNDING REGULATIONS

WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203707504577008021536730062.html?KEYWORDS=crowd-funding

On November 3, 2011, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act, H.R. 2930. The bill will allow an SEC registration exemption for crowd-funding, whereby entrepreneurs could raise up to $2 million in equity from individual investors, but must provide audited financial statements if the total money raised exceeds $1 million.

FOLLOW – UPS

SUPREME COURT NIXES GHOST HUNTERS CASE

Variety: http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118045749

The U.S. Supreme court has denied the defense’s petition for cert on the question whether Copyright law pre-empts state law breach of implied contract and breach of confidence claims.  Earlier this year, the 9th circuit ruled that it does NOT.  So…The case now heads back to the district court for trial.

UNIVERSAL MUSIC LOSES BID TO DISMISS CLASS ACTION OVER DIGITAL REVENUE (ROB ZOMBIE/RICK JAMES)

THREsq: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/universal-music-lawsuit-rob-zombie-rick-james-256662

UMG claims that digital downloads and ringtones should be classified as “sales,” garnering the artist a 10-20 percent royalty rate.  Rob Zombie, etc. claim that they should be classified as “licenses,” which would be closer to a 50/50 split.

VIACOM/YOUTUBE

THREsq: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/youtube-viacom-appeal-lawsuit-258734; http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/viacom-youtube-interpretation-copyright-law-260192
TechDirt: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111110/12320516711/viacom-says-that-letting-people-view-videos-phones-youtube-loses-dmca-safe-harbors.shtml

The 2nd Circuit now hearing the case issued an extraordinary order asking both sides to comment further on the “red flag” provisions in the DMCA.

CASES TO WATCH

UNIVERSAL MUSIC GROUP SUES GROOVESHARK

THR: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/universal-music-grooveshark-copyright-lawsuit-263714

Digital Music News: http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2011/111123grooveshark?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Direct Link to Complaint: http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/uploads/b9/82/b9829ebb37bd5f1a25fc839df6ea6db7/grooveshark.pdf

UMG contends that Grooveshark is a “pirate website” that streams unauthorized copyrighted material to its users (reportedly 600 million minutes a month to 30 million unique users).

The interesting twist in this case is that UMG also accuses Grooveshark employees, by name, including the CEO and other senior executives, of uploading over 113,000 unauthorized songs to the site.

Chart detailing the alleged song uploads by Grooveshark employees –
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/legal/grooveshark2.jpg

First Sound Recording Copyright Termination Suit Filed

Lommen Abdo: http://www.lommen.com/Firm-News/Legal-Headlines/Termination-of-Copyright-Transfers.aspx

Practice Point: If you have a client who is a legacy songwriter or recording artist and who signed an agreement in 1978 or shortly after, now would be a good time to review those prior agreements and catalogs and serve notices of termination under the U.S. Copyright Act. Failure to do so may result in the loss of valuable reversion rights.

PARAMOUNT SUES FOR OWNERSHIP OF LA DOLCE VITA

THREsq: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/paramount-sues-fellini-la-dolce-vita-257681

Paramount filed a complaint in California federal court against International Media Films, who also claims to be the valid copyright owner of La Dolce Vita.  Both claim ownership through a convoluted chain of title. The outcome of the Golan v. Holder case might make Paramount’s claim moot. If the Supreme Court restores copyrighted works to the public domain, including La Dolce Vita, then no one actually would have a valid copyright in the film and it would be in the public domain.

MUSIC LABEL SUES DEMANDING ‘50/50’ DISTRIBUTORS CHANGE FILM TITLE

THREsq: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/50-50-movie-seth-rogen-lawsuit-263572
50/50 TM info: http://www.trademarks411.com/marks/78228773-phifty-50

Eastland Music Group filed the federal lawsuit in Illinois claiming it has been using the 50/50 mark since 2000 in connection with entertainment services and products. As evidence, they point to its website, phifty-50.com (fifty spelled with a “ph”), which currently has a sign post on its front page adorned with “50/50” (fifty slash fifty like the film title).

They are demanding a permanent injunction against use of the title, the destruction of all products where “50-50” is affixed, and an award of all of the film’s sales and revenues as a result of the alleged infringement.

CAR FRESHNER TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT CASE:

Lexology: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ffd801cb-72c3-49fb-bd23-5ff8df0daf9b

Link to decision: http://www.scribd.com/doc/67629206/Decision-Tree-Freshner-Getty

The Car Freshner Corporation, maker of that tree-shaped, rear-view mirror hanging car air freshener is suing Getty Images for trademark infringement over a number of images in its stock photo inventory that include a tree-shaped air freshener.

Getty filed a motion to dismiss but in late October 2011, the court denied that motion. The opinion reads: “after reviewing the images on Defendants’ website containing the Tree Marks, the Court finds plausible the allegation that a purchaser and/or user of Defendants’ images could be confused as to the source of origin of the images, believing incorrectly that ‘they originate from, are sponsored by, are approved by, or in someway are affiliated with Plaintiffs.’”

NEW FILINGS TO WATCH OUT FOR

CAPITOL RECORDS v. DEFRIES

Jason Pascal, VP of The Orchard, brought our attention to this complaint,  filed in the SDNY. The former manager of David Bowie, Mick Ronson and others seems to be taking the position that anyone meeting what he deems to be a co-author has a right to non-exclusively license the whole master.  Consequently, via his relationship with the  Ronson estate, he digitally released Pin-Ups by David Bowie, American Fool by John Mellencamp, Bad Company by Bad Company, Transformer by Lou Reed, and several others.  All of these titles had performances by Mick Ronson and the defendant is claiming he is a co-author.  The record labels  finally sued.

TAYMOR v. Eight Legged Productions, LLC


Playwright and Director Julie Taymor, who earlier this year was replaced on the beleaguered production of Spiderman, has filed suit against the shows’ producers and her co-writer alleging breach of contract unfair competition, and copyright claims relating to the show’s use of material she created in subsequent productions and tours without her approval, and for failure to pay royalties due.
Do us a favor (ok, 3):
  • Subscribe in iTunes, or your favorite music software.
  • Give us a review
  • Tell your friends about our show!
Follow us on twitter. Just follow @entlawupdate and you’ll be notified about our episodes as they become available. We also tweet about our upcoming topics, when we’re looking for guests, and so on., so if you have topics you think we should cover, please feel free to send us your ideas, suggestions, etc.

And of course, you can email us.  The address is entertainmentlawupdate@gmail.com. and our listener, voice-feedback phone line is 310-243-6231

 

Get Updates by email

Subscribe to get our latest content by email.

Powered by ConvertKit

4 thoughts on “Episode 26 – Attack of the Little Trees!

  1. Pingback: Entertainment Law Update Episode 26 – Attack of the Little Trees! | Law Offices of Gordon P. Firemark | Theatre, Film, Television, Music & New Media Attorneys

  2. Pingback: Entertainment Law Update Podcast 26: Zombies, Crowds, & Trees «



Comments are closed.