Raging Bulls on the Stairway to Heaven
Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed
Subscribe: Google Podcasts | Android | Email | RSS
Raging Bull case in the Supreme Court
“Stairway to Heaven”
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 https://entertainmentlawupdate.com/clio
Pharrell Williams and Will.i.am Settlement Trademark Lawsuit
See Episode 42 on the original story
Quentin Tarantino Files New Gawker Lawsuit Over ‘Hateful Eight’ Script Leak
See Episode 48 on the original suit (http://firemark.com/2014/03/21/episode-48-google-wins-some-loses-some-and-more/)
Update: Tarantino Withdraws Lawsuit Against Gawker after Refile
Midnight Rider: Gregg Allman Files Lawsuit Against Producers
European Right to be Forgotten
Smokey Robinson’s Ex-Wife Demands Share of Hit Songs
How Many Pieces of Flair Do you Have? Obtaining Merchandising Rights from Actors
Famous 1923 Silent Film Sparks Copyright Lawsuit Over a Clock
Dr. Dre Loses $3 Million Royalty Claim on Debut Album
3 Replies to “Raging Bulls on the Stairway to Heaven”
Congratulations of reaching the BIG FIVE-OHHH with you podcasts! Great work!
Have a great week,
I hope we can finally get around to getting together. I enjoyed the last episode, but I do not believe your recent analysis of Smokey Robinson’s termination issues were accurate. You stated (or implied) that as the result of Smokey’s termination, his ex-wife would no longer receive any monies related to those copyrights. The former publisher, however, would be entitled to continue to collect monies from prior licenses under the derivative works exception. See Mills Music v. Snyder, 469 U.S. 153 (1985) and Woods v. Bourne Co., 60 F.3d 978 (2d Cir. 1995).
Furthermore, the exclusive rights of copyright are not subject to community property laws (they are preempted); however, the revenues generated from copyright are subject to community property laws. See Rodrigue v. Rodrigue, 218 F.3d 432 (5th Cir. 2000). For a good summary of Rodrigue and Marriage of Worth, see Berry v. Berry, 127 Haw. 243 (2012) from Hawaii.
Thanks so much Robert,
And then I will be discussing this further next episode to clarify some issues, and add a bit of nuance that we left out of our earlier discussion.
Thanks again. And thanks for listening.
Comments are closed.