Learning about Entertainment Law

If you are a person interested in the Entertainment Law and enjoy learning new things within the subject, “Entertainment Law Update” podcast with Gordon Firemark will be very valuable for you.  On this 1-hour monthly show, attorneys Gordon Firemark and Tamera Bennett talk about some legal and business stories happening at the moment in the Entertainment industry. They give their opinion, analysis and legal advice.

By listening to these great lawyers I have learned a lot from different cases dealing with copyright, trademarks and breach of contract in the Film/TV industry.

In the Entertainment Law Update episode 33- “Cease and desist, but nicely,” I’ve learned about:

The 50/50 Trademark Lawsuit is a case in which Eastland Music Group accused Lionsgate of trademark infringement on the movie called 50/50.  According to Firemark, “a title alone is not protected by trademark, it has to be a series.”  Eastland Music Group alleged that they have been using the 50/50 since 2000 for entertainment purposes.  The label wanted to prevent the film’s release.  Sadly for the plaintiffs, the judge in charge of the case filed in favor of the defendants.

"Within the first 12 minutes of the movie, the co-star Adam played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, states that he has a 50/50 chance of survival after being diagnosed with a rare form of spinal cancer. The remainder of the movie revolves around whether Adam will survive his 50/50 diagnosis. The movie and packaging make clear that 50/50 refers to the survival odds related to the character Adams’ cancer diagnosis, and Eastland has not plausibly pled any possibility of confusion between the movie and Eastland’s musical (sic) group, or Eastland’s music related business use of the mark 'PHIFTY-50.”- Judge Lindberg

The title of the movie describes the content of it. Obviously no one would ever confuse the film with the music label. Their meanings are totally opposite.  I am glad about the judge’s decision. Some people file lawsuits over nothing.

Another interesting case I learned about dealing with television was:

Forest Park Pictures V. Universal Television Network, Inc.

The actor Hayden Christensen filed a lawsuit under the California state law against USA Television Network for stealing his concept for the TV series “Royal Pains.” In 2005, Christensen pitched to an executive at USA Network the idea of a show called “House Call,” in which a doctor, after being excluded from the medical community moves to Malibu and becomes the doctor of the rich and famous.  They created biographies, themes and storylines for it. In 2009, USA Network presented “Royal Pains,” a show with a similar concept. The only difference was the state in which the doctor was working.

In my humble opinion, I hope Hayden Christensen wins this case, because I see a huge resemblance on the two shows.

In episode 36- Faulkner, Einstein, Superman and Talent Managers, I learned about:

Faulkner Literary Rights, LLC v. Sony Pictures Classics, Inc., and John Doe Persons or Entities:  

On this case, Faulkner Literary Rights accused Sony Pictures Classics and John Doe persons of copyright infringement in the film “Midnight in Paris.” The funny part about this case is that the alleged “copyright” is on a sentence said by the main character (Owen Wilson), which quotes William Faulkner.  “The past is not dead! Actually, it's not even past. You know who said that? Faulkner. And he was right. And I met him, too. I ran into him at a dinner party.”- Wilson.

 A representative for the studio said: “This is a frivolous lawsuit and we are confident we will prevail in defending it.  There is no question this brief reference (10 words) to a quote from a public speech Faulkner gave constitutes fair use and any claim to the contrary is without merit.”

I definitely agree with the studio that it was “Fair Use.” It was a simple line on the movie in which they mentioned who the author of the phrase was. They gave proper distinction to William Faulkner.

There are many more legal cases on this podcast, but I would end up giving you a 7-page post if I analyze them all. I encourage everyone to listen to it. Firemark’s and Bennett’s analysis are very enriching.

By reviewing all of these cases, I can see the big picture now. I have to be very careful on any production project that I launch within my company. I will analyze and research every single legal aspect and risks that I may encounter. My sincere advice to everyone is, file your trademarks, copyrights and have clear contracts on the table. That way no one can mess with you.