November 14, 2018
Fox News Network, LLC v. TV Eyes, Inc.
Speaker: Dale Cendali, Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Please join us for a fascinating discussion about the future of fair use with Kirkland & Ellis partner Dale Cendali. Dale recently won a sweeping victory for her client Fox News in Fox News Network, LLC v. TVEyes, Inc., when the Second Circuit held on appeal on February 27, 2018 that TVEyes’ use of Fox News’ video clips was not a fair use.
Dale Cendali is a nationally recognized leader in the field of intellectual property litigation, having successfully litigated and tried numerous high-profile cases, and having argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. Her practice encompasses copyright, trademark, false advertising, patent, Internet, and trade secrets law, as well as defamation, the right of publicity, privacy, and complex contract disputes. Dale heads the Copyright, Trademark, Internet and Advertising practice group at Kirkland & Ellis LLP.
The National Law Journal selected her as one of the “100 Most Influential Lawyers in America.” Law360 named Dale one of the 25 “Icons of IP,” who have “made an indelible mark in the IP area,” as well as a “Media and Entertainment MVP.” She was also named on the Hollywood Reporter’s “Power Lawyers 2018: Hollywood’s Top 100 Attorneys.” Dale has repeatedly been ranked as a “top tier” lawyer by Chambers Global and Chambers USA, which describes her as “one of the best lawyers in the country” in her field. In 2018, Dale was recognized as “Litigator of the Week” by The American Lawyer, for winning two copyright cases on the same day in both the Ninth and Second Circuits. The World Trademark Review named Dale a “revered branding expert” who “remains keenly engaged in the development of the law;” “at the top of anybody’s list of the best trademark lawyers in the country.” Euromoney Legal Media Group has also named Dale as both “Best in Copyright” and “Best in Trademark” in the Americas at its Women in Business Law Awards, and she was named an Outstanding Litigator in New York, as well as one of the Top 10 Women in IP by Managing Intellectual Property. She also has repeatedly been named by Super Lawyers among “The Top 100 New York Lawyers” and “The Top 50 Female New York Lawyers,” and was profiled in the feature story “Truth, Justice and the Cendali Way” in the 2007 New York Metro edition of Super Lawyers Magazine.
She is also a prolific writer and editor, and has long been active in the bar. She co-edited the ABA’s Copyright Litigation Strategies Handbook and was contributing editor of Chambers Global’s Guide to Trade Marks. For over 15 years, she has co-authored the Copyright chapter of West’s volume Successful Partnering Between Inside and Outside Counsel. In 2010, INTA elected Dale to serve as Counsel, the highest-ranking position in the organization for an outside counsel. She has also INTA’s Dilution, Enforcement, and Copyright Committees and is the current chair of INTA’s copyright policy group. Dale has held numerous other leadership positions in the bar, including serving as Vice Chair of the Copyright Division and chair of the IP Special Issues Division for the IP Section of the ABA, as well as on Council for the ABA IP Section. Among other positions, Dale is head of the IP Council of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, and is the former Chair of the New York City Bar’s Trademarks and Unfair Competition Committee. In 2015 Dale was selected as an Adviser for The American Law Institute’s project, Restatement of the Law, Copyright.
Dale also has long been an adjunct professor at Harvard Law School, teaching a full-semester class each fall about copyright and trademark litigation.
October 10, 2018
Filtering Films: What Consumers Would Cut if Only They Could
Speaker: Professor Doug Lichtman, UCLA School of Law
In 2016, the technology startup VidAngel offered a movie streaming service that empowered users to mute potentially offensive audio and cut potentially offensive video from Hollywood films. Copyright litigation forced VidAngel’s service offline in December of that year. But, in the preceding eleven-and-a-half months, VidAngel managed to transmit roughly four million filtered streams and, for each of them, to record not only which filters were applied, but also how many minutes of the resulting film each user then watched. In this talk, Professor Lichtman will use the VidAngel data to examine the market for filtered motion picture content. Are filters used primarily to filter intimacy or violence? Are users more likely filter the word “f*ck” or the word “Christ”? And how do filters impact a viewer’s overall experience, for example as measured by how much of the movie they in the end choose to watch?
Doug Lichtman is a tenured professor of law at UCLA. He joined the faculty in 2007, having previously spent ten years teaching and writing at the University of Chicago. His areas of specialty are patent law and copyright law. Lichtman’s academic work has been featured in journals including the Journal of Law & Economics, the Yale Law Journal, and the Harvard Business Review. He also writes for mainstream publications like the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times. In addition to his academic pursuits, Mr. Lichtman maintains an active consulting practice, advising Fortune 100 clients and major institutional investors on patent, copyright and antitrust strategy. He also manages a private litigation finance fund. Professor Lichtman has undergraduate degrees in electrical engineering and computer science from Duke University, and a JD from Yale Law School. He can be reached via email at email@example.com.
September 05, 2018
Movie Censorship: Then and Now – How Hollywood fought state censors to win broader First Amendment rights for all.
Speaker: Jeremy Geltzer
Please join us for an evening of risqué business as we focus on the history and current state of film censorship with Jeremy Geltzer. While many industry attorneys are immersed in the mechanics of production and distribution, few appreciate how Hollywood played a vital role in expanding civil liberties and the legal interpretation of First Amendment rights.
From the earliest days of movie making, kissing couples, scantily clad boxers, and liberated female-flappers aggravated moral authorities. Today’s censorship impacts unfavorable political speech (i.e., Citizens United v. FEC), Ag Gag (i.e., Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Herbert (9th Cir., 2017)), tax credits (Machete Prods. v. Page (5th Cir., 2016)), and more. On the international stage, content regulations in China, India, and the EU even more directly impact filmmaking at major studios.
Jeremy, a long time member of the Copyright Society, has worked in house at Paramount Pictures, and on extended contracts at ABC, Amazon Studios, Lionsgate, and Warner Bros. Prior to his legal career he wrote and produced interstitial documentaries at Turner Classic Movies, interviewing classic stars such as Robert Mitchum, Jane Russell, Charleton Heston, and Ann Miller. Jeremy is the author of several books, including “Dirty Words & Filthy Pictures: Film and the First Amendment,” “Film Censorship in America: a State-By-State History,” “Latino Hollywood,” and “Race Films: Independent African American Filmmaking.”
A life long lover of movies, Jeremy promises to deliver passion for film, edgy and controversial discussion, and thought provoking legal context to First Amendment issues affecting the business of filmmaking.
June 11, 2018
The First Annual Jamie Lichtman Members’ Soirée
Speaker: Bill Patry, in Conversation with Jim Gladstone
Please join us for an informal conversation with Bill Patry, Senior Copyright Counsel at Google, author of the treatise “Patry on Copyright” (among other books), and former Policy Planning Advisor to the Register of Copyrights and copyright counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on the Judiciary. Bill will talk about how he came to copyright law (after obtaining undergraduate and graduate degrees in music composition), the invaluable assistance he received from the past greats of the copyright bar, including Herman Finkelstein (then General Counsel of ASCAP), Alan Latman, Mel Nimmer, and Barbara Ringer, and how Jack Valenti was the inspiration for his book “Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars.”
A Northern Californian from Tiburon, Bill began his career as a copyright lawyer in Washington DC with the firm of Paskus, Gordon & Hyman, working for Jon Baumgarten, a former General Counsel of the Copyright Office. The firm represented the MPAA, the Association of American Publishers, the National Music Publishers, and other trade associations representing the content industry. With the closing of Paskus’ DC office, Bill became a Policy Planning Advisor to the Register of Copyrights, where he worked on U.S. joining the Berne Convention, NAFTA, and cases before the Supreme Court such as Feist and Stewart v. Abend. After his work with the Copyright Office, Bill became copyright counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary. After the huge 1994 shake-up in the House, Bill moved to Manhattan, where he was a full-time law professor at the Cardozo School of Law from 1995-2000, and then in private practice. He joined Google in October 2006..
Bill is the author of many books, including the seven-volume “Patry on Copyright,” “Patry on Fair Use” (in print since 1985), “Latman’s The Copyright Law,” numerous law review articles, and two general audience books, “How to Fix Copyright” (Oxford University Press 2011), and “Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars” (Oxford University Press 2009), both of which he regrets writing. His works have been cited in 11 different Supreme Court cases and approximately 400 lower court opinions, but he would rather be riding a bike up Mt. Tam than reading copyright cases.
May 14, 2018
Copyright Misuse or Doctrine Abuse – Disney Enterprises, Inc. v. Redbox Automated Retail, LLC
Speaker: Robert Rotstein
Historically, the courts have shown great reluctance to apply the oft-raised but rarely successful copyright-misuse defense. Please join us for an interactive presentation about the misuse defense and its application (and non-application), including a discussion of the recent district court opinion in Disney Enterprises, Inc., v. Redbox Automated Retail, LLC. Through a series of hypothetical scenarios, Bob Rotstein will trace the history of the misuse defense and address whether the Redbox opinion is an outlier or rather signals a new judicial willingness to apply the defense.
Robert Rotstein is an entertainment attorney with over thirty five years of experience in the industry. He is a co-chair of Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp’s Entertainment & IP Litigation Practice Group. Mr. Rotstein specializes in litigation with a focus on intellectual property and technology, copyright, and entertainment matters. He has represented all of the major motion picture studios and many well-known writers, producers, directors, and musicians. Over the course of his legal career, Mr. Rotstein has represented clients such as Michael Jackson, Quincy Jones, Lionel Richie, John Sayles, Kenny “Babyface” Edmonds, and James Cameron (e.g. obtaining summary judgment for Cameron and his company in a lawsuit involving Cameron’s blockbuster motion picture Avatar).
Mr. Rotstein received his J.D. from the University of California Los Angeles School of Law, graduating Order of the Coif and served as an editor on the UCLA Law Review. Upon graduation from law school, Robert served as a judicial law clerk to now U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, then Circuit Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Rotstein also authored a law review article in the Chicago Kent Law Review entitled “Beyond Mataphor: Copyright Infringement and the Fiction of the Work,” 68 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 725 (1992) that explores the relationship between literary theory and copyright law, and has also taught as an adjunct professor at Loyola Law School in teaching Copyright Law.
Robert Rotstein, with James Patterson, is the author of The Family Lawyer, the title story of the New York Times bestselling collection. Mr. Rotstein has written Corrupt Practices, Reckless Disregard, and The Bomb Maker’s Son. His forthcoming novel We, the Jury, a psychological drama, is scheduled to be released by Blackstone Publishing in early 2019.
April 09, 2018
The Black Hole of the First Amendment and the Right of Publicity
Speaker: Professor Jennifer Rothman
Please join us for an insightful presentation about the increasingly frequent clash between the right of publicity and the First Amendment. Professor Rothman will discuss recent litigation of particular relevance to the film, television, and video game industries, including a discussion of the recently-decided California Court of Appeal case Olivia de Havilland v. FX Networks. Rothman filed an amicus brief in the case on behalf of Intellectual Property and Constitutional Law Professors, and participated in oral arguments. She will discuss insights from her forthcoming book, The Right of Publicity: Privacy Reimagined for a Public World (Harvard University Press 2018), for resolving these conflicts, particularly in the context of expressive works.
Rothman is a Professor of Law and the Joseph Scott Fellow at Loyola Law School, in Los Angeles. She is also an elected member of the American Law Institute, and an affiliated fellow at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project. She is nationally recognized for her scholarship on intellectual property and constitutional law. Her website, Rothman’s Roadmap to the Right of Publicity, www.rightofpublicityroadmap.com, is the go-to place for information on the right of publicity. Her forthcoming book The Right of Publicity: Privacy Reimagined for the Public World, published by Harvard University Press, challenges the conventional story of the right’s development, and considers how a better understanding of how it developed can solve a host of today’s challenges. Before embarking on her legal career, Rothman received an M.F.A. from USC’s School of Cinematic Arts and worked in the film industry.
Rothman received her J.D. from UCLA, where she graduated first in her class and won the Jerry Pacht Memorial Constitutional Law Award for her scholarship in that field. Rothman served as law clerk to the Honorable Marsha S. Berzon of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco and then practiced as an entertainment and intellectual property litigator in Los Angeles at Irell & Manella.
March 12, 2018
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN CHINESE COPYRIGHT AND ENTERTAINMENT LAW: ARE U.S. AND CHINESE LAW AND PRACTICE CONVERGING?
Axel aus der Mühlen Memorial Lecture on International Law
Speaker: Dr. Seagull Haiyan Song
The entertainment industry in China has undergone rapid growth in recent years. Please join us for a fascinating discussion of the trends that are emerging in Chinese entertainment law, including the substantial similarity test in copyright infringement analysis, protection of movie titles and story characters through trademark and anti-unfair competition law, protection of rights to privacy and reputation, and the treatment of freedom of speech and the public’s right to information. Chinese courts’ decisions and reasoning are showing signs that Chinese and U.S. law may be converging, which will have far-reaching implications in China’s entertainment industry for years to come.
Dr. Seagull Haiyan Song is a law professor, practicing attorney and published author. She is the leading authority in the field of US-China entertainment law and intellectual property law. Dr. Song currently serves as Senior Advisor at Hogan Lovells LLP, and Founding Director at Asia-America Law Institute at Loyola Law School LA. She also teaches entertainment law at Peking University School of Law, China Renmin University School of Law and Beijing Film Academy.
Dr. Song has practiced law in mainland China, Hong Kong and the United States for over twenty years. Before joining the academic world in 2012, Dr. Song was Senior Counsel with Disney, overseeing the company’s intellectual property division in the Asia Pacific region, a consultant with Arnold & Porter LLP, and a partner with King and Wood Mallesons, heading the intellectual property practice of the firm’s Shanghai Office. Dr. Song has been acclaimed as an “Asia Law Leading Lawyer” in the field of intellectual property law for five years since 2006. Dr. Song was honored by the Asia Society as a rising Asian leader through its Asia21 Fellows program and later was invited to be a Board Director and Executive Committee member of the Asia Society Southern California Center and also Co-Chair of the US-China Film Summit Committee.
Dr. Song has published numerous books and articles in the field of US-China intellectual property law and entertainment law. Her recent books include: Entertainment Law (The Commercial Press, 2nd ed., 2018), the first leading treatise on the subject of entertainment law in China; Transnational Intellectual Property Law (Edward Elgar, 2018, co-authoring with Prof. Robert Merges); Selected Chinese Patent Cases, co-authoring with Chinese Supreme People’s Court (Wolters Kluwer, 2014); New Challenges of Chinese Copyright Law (Kluwer Law International, 2011) etc. Dr. Song is also one of the five participating U.S. experts in the 2013 US-China IP Dialogue White Paper, co-released by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and China Renmin University. Dr. Song is a frequent speaker around the world on U.S.-China intellectual property and entertainment law issues and recent developments.
Dr. Song received her first LL.M degree from Hong Kong University and her second LL.M and J.S.D (Doctorate of the Science of Law) from University of California, Berkeley School of Law. She is admitted to the Bar of People’s Republic of China and the California Bar of the United States.
February 12, 2018
COPYRIGHT & MEDIA DEVELOPMENTS 2017: THE BIG PICTURE
Speaker: Jay Dougherty, Professor of Law and Director, Entertainment & Media Law Institute, Loyola Law School
Join Loyola Law School Professor and former Society President Jay Dougherty for a tour through important decisions in copyright and media law in the last year. From cross-border authorship and transmission cases to fair use, idea protection, trademark and docudrama issues, 2017 has left us with much to discuss and some cases to watch in 2018 as well.
Jay is currently a Professor of Law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, where he teaches Copyright Law, Entertainment Law and related courses and is Director of its Entertainment & Media Law Institute and Concentration Program. He also is Senior Counsel to Hogan Lovells US LLC. Prof. Dougherty has worked in the Entertainment Department of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison in New York, the Motion Picture/Television/Music Departments of Mitchell, Silberberg & Knupp in Los Angeles, the legal departments at United Artists Pictures and MGM Pictures and the business affairs department of Morgan Creek Productions. Professor Dougherty moved to the legal department of Twentieth Century Fox, where he became Senior Vice-President, Motion Picture Production and Worldwide Acquisition Legal Affairs. Prior to Loyola, he was Assistant General Counsel for Turner Broadcasting System, responsible for Turner Pictures. Professor Dougherty joined full-time academia at Loyola in 1997, receiving tenure in 2003. He is a professional rock guitarist.
Prof. Dougherty received his B.A. from Yale (magna cum laude), and his J.D. with honors from Columbia University School of Law. He was President of the Los Angeles Copyright Society in 1996-97 and was Chairperson of the Executive Committee of the Los Angeles Country Bar Association’s Entertainment Law & Intellectual Property Section in 2012-13, and is currently a member of the Executive Committee of the L.A. Branch of the Copyright Society of the U.S.A. His articles on authorship of motion pictures and the conflict between freedom of speech and the right of publicity have been published in major law reviews. He became Co-Editor in Chief of the Journal of the Copyright Society of the U.S.A. in 2008, and is currently the Editor-in-Chief. He has received awards from the Beverly Hills Bar Association and the Association of Media & Entertainment Counsel. His recent writings include “The Misapplication of ‘Mastermind’: A Mutant Species of Work for Hire and the Mystery of Disappearing Copyrights” and “Now You Own It, Now You Don’t—Or Do You?: Copyright and Related Rights in Magic Productions and Performances.”
January 08, 2018
Authorship in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Speakers: Kelly Klaus and Anjan Choudhury
Section 102(a) tells us: “Copyright protection subsists … in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression.” But what does authorship mean in a world where non-humans – computers, robots, even crested macaques – can and do play significant roles in creating expressive works? Kelly Klaus and Anjan Choudhury will ring in the new year with a discussion of developments in technology, the Copyright Office, and copyright litigation – including, of course, the celebrated “Monkey Selfie” case.
Kelly and Anjan are litigators at Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, where they specialize in copyright, media, and entertainment matters.
Kelly, a Trustee of LACS, regularly represents and counsels the major motion picture studios and recorded music companies, as well as a variety of other copyright owners. Kelly currently represents, among others, the plaintiff studios in infringement and DMCA litigation against the VidAngel streaming service; the members of the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment in infringement litigation against the TickBox TV service; Warner Bros. and TMZ in copyright litigation filed by Jared Leto; and Universal Music in an antitrust action challenging the pricing of digital downloads. Within the last few years, Kelly has tried cases for SoundExchange (the digital performance rights organization) before the Copyright Royalty Board in the statutory webcasting rate-setting proceeding; and the NCAA in the O’Bannon antitrust litigation. Kelly has been recognized by numerous publications, including The Hollywood Reporter, Daily Journal, and Law 360 as one of the leading practitioners in the copyright and entertainment area. Kelly received his B.A. from UCLA and his J.D. from Stanford. He joined Munger, Tolles in 1996, after clerking for Justice Kennedy on the Supreme Court.
Anjan’s recent experience includes representing Fox’s studio and network entities in contingent compensation disputes brought by executives and talent on the television series Bones; SoundExchange in the webcasting rate proceeding; and Warner Bros. in a contingent compensation dispute with Sylvester Stallone’s loan-out company. Anjan regularly counsels record companies and studios on legal issues arising from evolving models of digital distribution. He regularly speaks at industry conferences and webinars on these subjects, including presentations at South By Southwest, Digital Hollywood, the Harvard Law School Association, and Stafford CLE Webinars. Anjan was named an “Up Next” rising star in entertainment litigation in Variety’s 2015 Legal Impact Report; and one of 2016’s “Best Under 40” lawyers in the country by the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association. Anjan received his B.A. from George Washington University and his J.D. from Harvard. After graduation, Anjan clerked for Judge Berzon on the Ninth Circuit.
December 11, 2017
Music Licensing: A Medley of Chart-Topping Issues
Speaker: Jacqueline C. Charlesworth
Jacqueline Charlesworth will present hot topics in music licensing. Come and tune in to hear the latest in the ongoing debate over the DOJ’s 100% licensing mandate for ASCAP and BMI, an update on recent developments in litigation over pre-72 sound recordings, and efforts to modernize the mechanical compulsory license.
Jacqueline C. Charlesworth, an attorney at the law firm Covington & Burling, practices intellectual property law, with an emphasis on copyright issues. Before joining Covington’s New York office, she served for three years as General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights at the U.S. Copyright Office in Washington, D.C.
While at the Copyright Office, Ms. Charlesworth had primary responsibility for interpretation of the U.S. Copyright Act. As General Counsel she oversaw a wide range of litigation, legislative, regulatory, and policy matters, including the Office’s participation in cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, rulemaking proceedings under the DMCA and other provisions, legal review of Copyright Royalty Board decisions, the administration of statutory cable, satellite, and music licenses, and copyright registration and termination issues. She also advised Congress on copyright-related legislation and policy concerns.
Before joining the Copyright Office, Ms. Charlesworth was in private practice, where she handled IP-related litigation and transactional matters. Prior to that, she served as Senior Vice President and General Counsel of the National Music Publishers’ Association and Senior Vice President and General Counsel of The Harry Fox Agency.
Ms. Charlesworth received a B.A. from Brown University and a J.D. from Yale Law School, where she was an Executive Committee Editor of The Yale Law Journal and a founding member of the Yale Journal of Law & Feminism. Following law school, she clerked for Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and Judge Betty B. Fletcher of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
November 13, 2017
Beyond Registration: The U.S. Copyright Office’s Role in Copyright Law and Policy
Speaker: Sarang (Sy) Damle, General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights for the U.S. Copyright Office
In recent years, with increased attention to copyright issues in Congress, the courts, and the public at large, the U.S. Copyright Office has played a critical role in ensuring that sound legal and policy principles are kept at the fore. Through its policy and advisory work for Congress, its participation in international trade and treaty negotiations, its creation of educational programs and resources, its promulgation of rulemaking and regulatory guidance, and its involvement in copyright litigation, the Copyright Office is at the center of every major copyright issue today.
Sarang (Sy) Damle, General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights for the U.S. Copyright Office, will discuss the Office’s responsibilities, focusing in particular on its recent policy and litigation work. As general counsel, Mr. Damle provides legal guidance to the various divisions and programs of the Office, and he is frequently called upon by congressional offices, the U.S. Department of Justice, and other federal agencies for advice and assistance on copyright and other intellectual property laws.
Previously, Mr. Damle was an appellate litigator at the Department of Justice, where he served as lead counsel in over 40 appeals and participated in a number of high-profile Supreme Court matters, with a focus on intellectual property, administrative law, and separation of powers issues. Mr. Damle has been recognized by the National Law Journal for his work, both as one of the top “40 under 40” minority lawyers in the United States, and as one of “DC’s Rising Stars.”
Mr. Damle began his legal career as a law clerk to the Hon. Sandra L. Lynch of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. He received his JD from the University of Virginia, where he graduated first in his class. He also holds engineering and business degrees from the University of Pennsylvania, and was a software developer and information technology consultant prior to attending law school.
October 09, 2017
JONATHAN TAPLIN DISCUSSES HIS RECENT BOOK, “MOVE FAST AND BREAK THINGS: HOW FACEBOOK, GOOGLE AND AMAZON CORNERED CULTURE AND UNDERMINED DEMOCRACY”
Speaker: Jonathan Taplin
Join us for a fascinating evening as Taplin discusses what has been described as a “stinging polemic that traces the destructive monopolization of the internet by Google, Facebook and Amazon and proposes a new future for musicians, journalists, authors and filmmakers in the digital age.”
Jonathan Taplin is director emeritus of the Annenberg Innovation Lab at the University of Southern California and was professor at the USC Annenberg School from 2003-2016. He began his entertainment career as tour manager for Bob Dylan and The Band and was producer of numerous films, including The Last Waltz, Mean Streets, and To Die For, as well as 26 hours of television documentaries. Taplin served as vice president of media mergers and acquisitions at Merrill Lynch and was a founder of Intertainer, a pioneer video-on-demand company for cable and broadband Internet markets. Taplin holds two patents for video on demand technologies and has provided consulting services on Broadband technology to the President of Portugal and the Parliament of the Spanish state of Catalonia and the Government of Singapore.
Taplin graduated from Princeton University. He is a member of the Academy Of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, sits on the International Advisory Board of the Singapore Media Authority, and is a fellow at the Center for Public Diplomacy. He was appointed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to the California Broadband Task Force in January of 2007 and is a member of Mayor Eric Garcetti’s Council on Technology and Innovation.
September 11, 2017
CUTTING EDGE ISSUES ON CUTTING OFF RIGHTS: AN UPDATE ON U.S. COPYRIGHT TERMINATION
Speaker: Laura Brill, Kendall Brill & Kelly LLP
Many articles have been written about the floodgates that would open in 2013 and beyond with regard to Section 203 Copyright Termination. Commentators predicted that songwriters, recording artists, and producers from the late 1970’s and 1980’s would send numerous notices of termination and there would be litigation over work-for-hire and other issues. Laura Brill, partner at Kendall Brill & Kelly LLP (and formerly at Irell & Manella) will catch us up on some of the most interesting developments and aspects of Section 203 and 304 Copyright Termination. Come with your questions and opinions for a lively exchange of information and ideas.
With a focus on complex civil litigation and appeals relating to media, entertainment, commercial, and regulatory disputes, founding partner Laura W. Brill has secured precedent-setting victories in numerous appearances before state and federal courts. She is a certified appellate specialist who handles a broad array of high-profile business disputes involving contracts, torts, intellectual property, governance issues; First Amendment and other constitutional issues; fine art restitution; government contracting, and challenges to municipal regulation.
Ms Brill is a thought leader who publishes and speaks widely on legal issues, including the First Amendment, entertainment and copyright law, appellate practice, and the legal profession. She maintains an active pro bono docket, with a focus on equal rights, freedom of expression, and challenges to the use of the initiative process.
Ms. Brill received an A.B. from Brown University and graduated first in her class at Columbia University School of Law. Recognized as among the top appellate and intellectual property litigators in California, Ms. Brill served as a law clerk to the Honorable Wilfred Feinberg on the Second Circuit and to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, with whom she has co-authored several articles. Laura also has been a law school guest lecturer at Yale, Georgetown, UCLA, and USC.
June 12, 2017
2017 ANNUAL MEMBERS-ONLY MEETING
Speaker: Alex Kozinski
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
It was reported by state media in China that on January 14, 2017, Zhou Qiang, president of the Supreme People’s Court, delivered a speech calling on his colleagues to resist Western ideologies that threaten the leadership of the Communist Party, including constitutional democracy, separation of powers, and judicial independence. He called judicial independence a Western “trap,” and said Chinese courts must “dare to pull out the sword” to combat the erroneous Western notion and other false ideas that could undermine China’s judiciary system.
Alexander Hamilton, without breaking into rap cadence, wrote in The Federalist No. 78 in 1788:
“The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution. By a limited Constitution, I understand one which contains certain specified exceptions to the legislative authority; such, for instance, as that it shall pass no bills of attainder, no ex post facto laws, and the like. Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing. . . . . Nor does this conclusion by any means suppose a superiority of the judicial to the legislative power. It only supposes that the power of the people is superior to both; and that where the will of the legislature, declared in its statutes, stands in opposition to that of the people, declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former. They ought to regulate their decisions by the fundamental laws, rather than by those which are not fundamental.”
Judge Alex Kozinski will engage in a conversation with Society President Gary Bostwick on judicial independence today in the federal court system, how it is maintained by law, how tradition affects its exercise in everyday operation, the efforts federal judges individually must exert to maintain their independence and what challenges judicial independence faces in coming years. To the extent appropriate, the conversation may cover Judge Kozinski joining the dissent in Washington v. Trump, on whether the Court should reconsider the panel’s decision en banc.
The conversation will also delve into Judge Kozinski’s views on topics of interest to the Society’s members in other areas such as net neutrality, applying state anti-SLAPP laws in federal court, how a young man’s thinking was shaped by life under Soviet domination and the elusive craft of writing impactfully and to be understood.
Judge Kozinski was appointed United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit on November 7, 1985, and served as Chief Judge from 2007 to 2014. He graduated from UCLA, receiving an A.B. degree in 1972, and from UCLA Law School, receiving a J.D. degree in 1975.
Prior to his appointment to the appellate bench, Judge Kozinski served as Chief Judge of the United States Claims Court, 1982-85; Special Counsel, Merit Systems Protection Board, 1981-82; Assistant Counsel, Office of Counsel to the President, 1981; Deputy Legal Counsel, Office of President-Elect Reagan, 1980-81; Attorney, Covington & Burling, 1979-81; Attorney, Forry Golbert Singer & Gelles, 1977-79; Law Clerk to Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, 1976-77; and Law Clerk to Circuit Judge Anthony M. Kennedy, 1975-76.
Judge Kozinski is married to Marcy Jane Tiffany and has three children: Yale, Wyatt and Clayton, and three grandchildren: Quinn, Owen and Anna.
May 08, 2017
The Republication Quandary: Lessons Learned from the Rolling Stone Trial
Speaker: Elizabeth McNamara, partner Davis Wright Tremaine LLP and lead counsel in Eramo v Rolling Stone
If a client publishes something that draws a demand for correction or retraction, the careful attorney usually considers it and, if appropriate, approves publication of a correction. The Rolling Stone trial threw a wrench into the works. Perhaps the most revolutionary takeaway from the trial is that the republication doctrine, previously a sleepy concept invoked in largely predictable circumstances to restart the statute of limitations, is now used as a backdoor means to establish actual malice and liability because of a retraction. The Rolling Stone trial is not alone. Publishers now take care when they attempt to do the right thing and alert readers to errors in articles by corrections or editorial notes. Producers take care when they employ standard roll-out windows whereby a film or show opens on different platforms over time. These standard business practices are ripe for a trap tripped by plaintiffs who argue the work was “republished.” Liz will explore this development, a development little-known to even experienced attorneys, with other insights from weeks in the land of Jefferson – Charlottesville, VA.
Elizabeth McNamara is a partner in the New York office of Davis Wright Tremaine, nationally recognized in media defense. She has more than 30 years litigation and counseling experience in media and intellectual property law, representing publishers (books, magazines, newspapers, and websites), television and radio broadcasters, cable companies, and motion picture producers and distributors. Her litigation practice includes all areas of sophisticated IP, media and entertainment litigation at the trial and appellate level of federal and state courts, in such areas as libel, privacy, copyright, trademark, prior restraint, and reporter's shield laws. She was Rolling Stone’s counsel in Elias v. Rolling Stone LLC, et al., obtaining dismissal of the libel suit brought by three fraternity brothers against Rolling Stone and author Sabrina Rubin Erdely arising out of article "A Rape on Campus" and Eramo v. Rolling Stone LLC, et al. against Rolling Stone and Erdely in a libel suit by University of Virginia Dean Nicole Eramo resulting in verdicts against both defendants. The dispute has since settled.
April 17, 2017
ANYONE CAN SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ANYONE – AND THEY DO: THE DEMOCRATIZATION OF DEFAMATION
Speaker: Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Professor of Law at the UCLA School of Law and publisher of “The Volokh Conspiracy”
Today, though, the relatively poor and the anonymous (literally and figuratively) can speak to the world, and can often find an audience, in Google search results even if not in daily visitors to a site. And while this democratization has many virtues, it has the vices of those virtues. Anyone can say anything about anyone—and they do. It should therefore be no surprise that the legal system has been changing in response to these changes; but many of the changes are happening under the radar of the academy and of the Supreme Court—indeed, mostly outside any appellate court.
March 13, 2017
Boldly Going Where No Copyright Lawsuit Has Gone Before: Fan Films & the Battle for Axanar
Speaker: Speaker: Erin R. Ranahan, Partner, Winston & Strawn
Was the Axanar copyright infringement case brought by Paramount and CBS the final frontier of lawsuits against fan films – or just the beginning? With advances in technology enabling fan filmmakers to create low-budget films that look more and more like big-budget features, studios are left to decide whether to threaten and/or pursue litigation against some of their biggest fans, or allow fan films to live long and prosper.
In Axanar, Plaintiffs alleged that a 21-minute “mockumentary” fan film, Prelude to Axanar, and various draft screenplays for a yet-to-be produced longer fan film based on Prelude, constituted copyright infringement of fifty separate Star Trek works. After a year of hotly contested litigation, the Axanar case recently settled on the eve of trial. This was not before a wild ride in the media that featured surprising public statements by a Star Trek producer and director, the issuance of Star Trek fan film guidelines in the middle of the lawsuit, media scrutiny, and strong fan reaction.
Winston & Strawn partner Erin Ranahan will discuss her experience as lead defense counsel in the case, including what factors led Plaintiffs to target Defendants (despite the existence of hundreds of other Star Trek fan films), various challenges in the case, and rulings along the way, including those involving substantial similarity, liability and fair use. She will also address the potential impact this litigation will have on future cases.
Erin Ranahan is a Litigation Partner of Winston & Strawn, where she focuses her practice on copyright, new media, entertainment, trademark, right of publicity, and false advertising litigation. She has handled several high-profile intellectual property matters, including Axanar, and was on the team that won an important legal victory on behalf of Veoh in the landmark battle in UMG Recordings v. Veoh. Erin also successfully defended Myxer, a ringtone company and leader in ad-supported mobile entertainment, in a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by several of the world’s largest record companies, and represented several EMI entities that won summary judgment in the Nafal a copyright case, the original copyright infringement lawsuit against Jay-Z about the song “Big Pimpin.” She has and continues to represent Wolfgang’s Vault in various copyright and other intellectual property disputes. In 2016, Erin was recognized as a Law360 Rising Star, named to Benchmark Litigation’s “Under 40 Hot List,” and selected as one of the top “40 Under 40” attorneys by the Daily Journal. She was also recognized in The Legal 500 2016 for her work in copyright. She was named one of “Hollywood’s New Leaders” in Law in the October 2014 issue of Variety Magazine.
February 13, 2017
(Not) Tired of Being Alone: The State of the Law on Pre-1972 Sound Recordings
Speaker: Bobby Schwartz and Victor Jih
Starting in 2013, the owners of pre-1972 sound recordings by the Rolling Stones, The Beatles, and others were convincing judges of their right to control the broadcast of these works and collecting nine-figure settlements from SiriusXM and Pandora. In October 2016, SiriusXM paid over $100 million to settle a California class action brought by former members of The Turtles.
The recording owners’ strategy has hit a brick wall. CBS Radio was sued in New York and California by owners of iconic R&B recordings from the 1960s, such as Al Green’s Tired of Being Alone. Instead of settling the putative class actions, CBS moved immediately for summary judgment on the grounds that it was broadcasting post-1972, remastered and acoustically improved versions of the recordings that were registered for federal copyright and therefore not subject to state law. Judge Percy Anderson in the Central District of California agreed, and spared CBS from any liability or need to settle.
Irell & Manella partners Bobby Schwartz and Victor Jih will discuss their work for CBS. They will explain how a technical expert identified meaningful differences in plaintiffs’ remastered sound recordings, and how an old sound recording makes it from a vault in New Jersey to be streamed on a radio station’s website. They will also cover the state of the law around the country, including the important decision in December from the New York Court of Appeals in the Flo & Eddie v. SiriusXM case in which the court held that New York common law does not recognize a right of public performance for sound recordings.
Bobby Schwartz | Irell & Manella LLP
Bobby Schwartz is a Litigation Partner of Irell & Manella and a nationally recognized leader in large-stakes disputes, particularly in the media and entertainment industry. Bobby has successfully represented some of the country’s most influential companies in matters of far-reaching significance in a range of subject areas. Most recently, he delivered a huge victory to CBS in a California class action lawsuit over the broadcaster’s airing of music recorded before 1972. Bobby is currently defending video game publisher Take-Two Interactive, which is facing a class action alleging violation of the Biometric Information Privacy Act over its series of NBA 2K basketball video games. In 2016, he was named a “Power Lawyer” by The Hollywood Reporter, a “Leading IP Litigator” by the Daily Journal and ranked among the leading entertainment litigators by Chambers USA. In addition to his practice, Bobby serves on the Board of Directors of Bet Tzedek Legal Services.
Victor Jih | Irell & Manella LLP
Victor Jih is a Litigation Partner of Irell & Manella. He has significant experience in a broad selection of complex litigation matters, at both the trial and appellate levels. Victor’s areas of practice include entertainment, copyright and trademark, First Amendment, unfair competition, consumer privacy, class action defense, contract and other commercial disputes in forums across the nation. His major clients in recent years include computer software companies and hardware manufacturers, major motion picture studios, and other large companies in the Internet, entertainment and retail industries. Victor’s recent victories include defeating a putative class action filed against Hulu alleging violations of the Video Privacy Act, and defeating a consumer class action filed against Sega of America involving the Aliens: Colonial Marines video game. A long time avid debater, Victor also holds the position of debate coach at Brentwood School in Los Angeles. You may also recognize him as a contestant and winner of the 14th season of The Amazing Race, which he completed with his sister.
January 09, 2017
How President-elect Donald Trump’s Bullying Ways Might Impact Journalism and the Media Industry
Speaker: Susan Seager
Susan Seager, LACS Trustee, will discuss her study of Trump’s past as a libel bully and his potential impact on the First Amendment, media ownership, net neutrality and privacy on the Internet.
Media defense lawyers can learn much from Trump’s litigation strategies and weaknesses by examining Trump’s 30-year history of suits alleging libel and other speech-related claims. Seager recently authored a study of Trump’s speech-related lawsuits in her ABA article, “Donald K. Trump Is a Libel Bully But Also a Libel Loser.” The article became the subject of national news coverage in the New York Times and Washington Post and a skit on Comedy Central’s The Daily Show after the ABA tried to kill and censor Seager’s article by removing the words “bully” and “loser." The ABA later contended its edits were merely friendly suggestions and published Seager's article uncensored in the ABA’s Communications Lawyer Winter 2016 newsletter.
She also will comment upon Trump’s list of nominees for the Supreme Court and whether they have ruled on any First Amendment speech/press issues; the likelihood of Trump threatening or filing libel lawsuits as president; and whether Trump will use an appointment to the FCC to kill off the current consumer-friendly net neutrality rule, weaken media ownership rules and new privacy rules for internet service providers.
Susan E. Seager recently opened her own Los Angeles area solo practice as a media defense lawyer. She also writes as a part-time columnist for Law Newz and teaches media law as an adjunct professor of media law at the University of Southern California Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. Before law school, she worked as a journalist for the Los Angeles Herald Examiner, LA Daily Journal, United Press International, and San Luis Obispo Telegram Tribune, and also worked as a free-lance photographer covering the LA band scene in the early 1980’s, briefly managing the LA band BPeople. She has extensive experience as a media defense litigator, working most recently as a vice president of litigation at Fox Entertainment Group in Century City, where she handled defamation, privacy, right of publicity, and copyright claims and litigation. Before her in-house assignment, she was at Davis Wright Tremaine in Los Angeles. Susan has published op-eds in the LA Times and LA Daily Journal and several articles for the ABA’s Communications Lawyer. Susan holds a law degree from Yale Law School.
December 12, 2016
A Review of Recent and Pending Supreme Court Cases Focusing on Copyright and Intellectual Property
Speaker: Erwin Chemerinsky
Erwin Chemerinsky is the founding Dean and Distinguished Professor of Law, and Raymond Pryke Professor of First Amendment Law, at University of California, Irvine School of Law, with a joint appointment in Political Science.
Prior to assuming this position in 2008, he was the Alston and Bird Professor of Law and Political Science at Duke University from 2004-2008, and before that was a professor at the University of Southern California Law School from 1983-2004, including as the Sydney M. Irmas Professor of Public Interest Law, Legal Ethics, and Political Science. He also has taught at DePaul College of Law and UCLA Law School.
He is the author of ten books, including The Case Against the Supreme Court, published by Viking in 2014, and two books to be published by Yale University Press in 2017, Closing the Courthouse Doors: How the Supreme Court Made Your Rights Unenforceable and Renewing Free Speech on College Campuses (with Howard Gillman). He also is the author of more than 200 law review articles. He writes a weekly column for the Orange County Register, monthly columns for the ABA Journal and the Daily Journal, and frequent op-eds in newspapers across the country. In January 2014, National Jurist magazine named Dean Chemerinsky as the most influential person in legal education in the United States.
Chemerinsky holds a law degree from Harvard Law School and a bachelor’s degree from Northwestern University.
November 07, 2016
The gulf between the United States
and European IP system.
Another event highlighting why understanding it matters to American copyright attorneys.
Speaker: Daniel McClean
In the landmark case of Patrick Cariou v Richard Prince and Gagosian Gallery (2013), the US Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit) expanded the doctrine of “fair use” holding that copyright law does not require that an artist’s secondary use of visual material comment on the original artist, work or popular culture.
The court’s decision in Cariou v Prince et al, underscores significant territorial differences between how copyright exemptions for visual artists are applied in the United States and in Europe. Lacking the flexible provisions of fair use, it seems almost inconceivable that a European court would have reached the same conclusion as the US court did here.
The decision injects a lack of certainty as to how copyright law in the United States may be applied to artworks individually elsewhere. The case also reveals an elitist privileging of artworks canonised by the “high” art system over “lower” unacknowledged works (here, works of photography), an elitism which runs counter to the self-proclaimed, value “neutral” structure of copyright law.
This presentation will discuss the implications of Cariou v Prince for both copyright law and freedom of artistic expression, highlighting the current gulf between the legal systems of the United States and Europe in dealing with copyright defenses. It will go further, using this gulf as a springboard to illustrate philosophical and cultural justifications underpinning copyright law in the different legal systems, something any intellectual property lawyer in the United States must understand to be fluent in cross-ocean transactions.
Daniel McClean is a consultant at the London based law firm, Howard Kennedy LLP, where he specialises in art and cultural property law. He advises leading international art world clients (including artists, advisors, collectors, estates, galleries, museums and national governments) on transactions and agreements involving artworks and on dispute resolution, including relating to ownership, authentication, export and sale. Daniel also regularly advises clients (particularly artists and photographers) on the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights and defending infringement claims.
In 2002, he commissioned and edited an anthology of inter-disciplinary essays, “Dear Images: Art, Copyright and Culture” (Ridinghouse/ICA London), on the relationship between art and copyright law.
October 10, 2016
The Stairway to Heaven Trial: How Did Led Zeppelin Win by Convincing a Jury Stairway Was Not Substantially Similar?
Speaker: Peter Anderson
Led Zeppelin recently won a jury trial against claims the iconic guitar riff in “Stairway to Heaven” was copied from Spirit’s 1968 instrumental “Taurus.” Peter Anderson represented the surviving members of Led Zeppelin and Warner/Chappell and others in Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin, tried to a jury in June 2016. He will address what recordings were provided to the jury and why, what was used to address the claimed musical similarity and difficulties faced in defending a 45-year-old copyright claim. Hopefully, he will help the members feel the drama in the courtroom when the jury asked to listen once more to both songs and then reached a verdict within minutes.
The trial featured Led Zeppelin members Jimmy Page and Robert Plant testifying as well as Michael Skidmore, the Trustee of the Randy Craig Wolfe Trust, named after Spirit songwriter Randy Wolfe. Witnesses included Spirit band members, musicologists and those offering testimony on whether Led Zeppelin might have heard “Taurus” before composing the song.
Page and Plant denied having access to “Taurus” despite performing at some of the same concerts that Spirit performed at. Profits from the song’s continued exploitation were at stake.
The jury decided in favor of Led Zeppelin and various subsidiaries of Warner Music. It decided that the plaintiff owned the copyright to “Taurus”, that Led Zeppelin members had access, which the court instructed meant they had a reasonable chance to have heard “Taurus”, but there was no substantial similarity in the extrinsic elements of “Taurus” and “Stairway.”
Mr. Anderson has extensive experience in litigating copyright infringement cases over the last 36 years, including representing the prevailing parties in Stewart v. Abend and Seltzer v. Green Day. He has been named a “Super Lawyer” for the last ten years, and is a graduate of UCLA and UCLA Law School.
September 19, 2016
THE NATION’S MOST PROLIFIC COPYRIGHT PLAINTIFF
Emilie Kennedy, Pillar Law Group
A single plaintiff has been responsible in the past five years for nearly half the copyright lawsuits filed in the United States.
Is it a major movie studio that aggressively enforces its rights? Maybe a record company going after teenage downloaders? A software company angry others are installing copies without paying?
No, the nation’s most prolific copyright plaintiff is a small producer of adult films called Malibu Media, LLC.
It has filed over 5,000 lawsuits since 2012 against individuals for “sharing” its works over the BitTorrent network without permission. The lawsuits have largely succeeded, resulting in favorable settlements or judgments for Malibu, bringing a tidy profit from its litigation campaign. But its aggressiveness also has been highly controversial, causing proponents claiming to defend internet freedom to deride Malibu as a “copyright troll” bent on extorting settlements from parties who would rather pay up than expose themselves to public scorn from allegations they are sharing pornography over the internet.
Emilie Kennedy, an associate at Pillar Law Group APLC in Beverly Hills, and Malibu Media’s long-time outside counsel, will explain how Malibu’s anti-piracy campaign functions, how courts have dealt with this flood of lawsuits, what new copyright law has been made in the process, and will take on Malibu’s critics. Leading the discussion with Ms. Kennedy will be Ben Sheffner, Vice President, Legal Affairs at the Motion Picture Association of America.
Emilie Kennedy is an attorney with Pillar Law Group, APLC and has focused her legal career on protecting the content of movie studios, record labels, music publishers and songwriters. Her work is inspired, in large part, by her prior experience serving as Vice President, Business Affairs for a nationally recognized independent record label. She holds a B.A. from the University of Vermont, a Master’s in Music Business from the University of Miami and a J.D. from Florida International University and is a member of the Florida bar. During law school, she spent a summer studying copyright law at the University of Cambridge, in Cambridge, England and as a law clerk for the United States Copyright Office, Office of the General Counsel. Recently, she was awarded “Rising Star” by Florida Super Lawyers for Intellectual Property Litigation.
June 13, 2016
THE HURT LOCKER BOMBSHELL: THE RIGHT OF PUBLICITY AFTER SARVER V. CHARTIER
David Halberstadter, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP and Jeremiah Reynolds, Kinsella Weitzman Iser Kump & Aldisert LLP with special guest Mark Boal, Academy Award winning screenwriter and producer of The Hurt Locker, Zero Dark Thirty and In The Valley of Elah
This February, the 9th Circuit issued its long-awaited decision in Sarver v. Chartier - and in the process may have forever changed the market for “life story” rights. Affirming the anti-SLAPP victory in favor of the filmmakers of Best Picture-winner The Hurt Locker (including Summit Entertainment, director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal), the Court rejected a claim by Army Master Sergeant Jeffrey Sarver that he was entitled to compensation for the film’s alleged dramatization of his service in Iraq. At this year’s Annual Members-Only meeting, top LA entertainment litigators, David Halberstadter, who represented Summit Entertainment, and Jeremiah Reynolds, who represented Bigelow and Boal, will discuss the case in depth, and what it means for the future of right of publicity claims arising from dramatic works. They will also explore the creative process of transforming interviews of real people into fictional works, the often-asserted claim of “defamation by fiction,” the First Amendment protections available to motion pictures and television productions based on stories that have been “ripped from the headlines,” and where the decision leaves the use of celebrity images in video games and California’s “transformative use” test. And to make the event truly special, Mark Boal, Academy Award winning screenwriter and producer of The Hurt Locker, Zero Dark Thirty and In The Valley of Elah, will be on hand to describe his experiences writing the The Hurt Locker, answer questions, and present his perspective on this groundbreaking case.
David Halberstadter is deputy general counsel for Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP’s four California offices, representing traditional, institutional entertainment industry clients as well as new media companies in litigation relating to all aspects of motion picture, television and new media conception, development, finance, production and distribution. David both prosecutes and defends litigation on behalf of motion picture studios and production companies, television networks and producers, and Internet/new media companies on a wide variety of issues, including: copyright infringement, fair use, parody and termination; trademark infringement and unfair competition; defamation, rights of publicity, rights of privacy and the First Amendment; rights acquisitions and transfers; contract disputes between producers and talent; and production, financing, distribution and licensing matters. Jeremiah Reynolds is a partner at Kinsella Weitzman Iser Kump & Aldisert LLP where he specializes in entertainment-related disputes and complex business litigation. He has represented Justin Bieber, Michael Keaton, Sharon and Ozzy Osbourne, Kathryn Bigelow, Mark Boal, Robert Duvall, Kate Hudson, Reggie Bush, the Kardashian Family, Tom Hanks, Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs, among others. Recent honors include recognition by Variety in its Legal Impact Report for 2015 as one of the leading lawyers in the entertainment business, in addition to selection by Law360 as a Rising Star of 2015.
Notice of Action: At this Annual Meeting, members will also be asked to vote to approve the following slate of Officers and Trustees for the 2016-17 term: OFFICERS - Cathy Paul (President-Elect), James Gladstone (Vice President), Aaron Moss (Secretary), and Catherine Bridge (Treasurer); TRUSTEES-AT-LARGE - Valerie Barreiro, Janene Bassett, Laura Dawson, Michael Garfinkel, Susan Seager, Ben Sheffner, Joel Tantalo, Joel Weiner and Jason Zelin. (Current President James Lichtman and President-Elect Gary Bostwick will automatically assume the roles of Immediate Past President and President, respectively, at the commencement of the 2016-17 term.)
May 09, 2016
STREAMING CONSCIOUSNESS: UNDERSTANDING THE NEW WORLD OF DIGITAL MUSIC LICENSING
Eric Greenspan, Myman Greenspan Fineman Fox Rosenberg & Light, LLP & Jonas Kant, Sony/ATV Music Publishing
In just the past few years, the way music is consumed, licensed and distributed has changed dramatically. Digital sales have overtaken physical formats, and now streaming is growing exponentially faster than downloads. From iTunes to Spotify, to music television and motions pictures, copyright practitioners need to know how the music industry is evolving and the current issues that arise. Guiding you through the quagmire are two industry experts, Eric Greenspan, recognized as one of the “Five Music Attorneys To Know” and Jonas Kant, a senior executive at Sony/ATV Music Publishing. Topics will include negotiation, deal structure, and royalties for music use on television and radio, in feature films, streaming, and subscription services, as well as upheaval in the organizations that collect and distribute royalties, the complexities of co-owned works, and the future of music publishing and delivery.
Eric Greenspan, chairman of the music department at Myman Greenspan Fineman Fox Rosenberg & Light, LLP, has represented clients such as Red Hot Chili Peppers, Slash, Christina Aguilera, Guns N Roses, the Grateful Dead, Justin Bieber, and John Legend. Among his many accolades, Eric was featured in Billboard’s Top Music Lawyers in America and Hollywood Reporter’s Power Lawyers Top 100. Jonas Kant is the Senior Vice President of Business and Legal Affairs of Sony/ATV Music Publishing, the world’s largest music publisher. A 15 year veteran of the company, Jonas oversees all aspects of the company’s West Coast business and legal matters (copyright acquisition, songwriter, co-publishing, administration, major film and television licenses, new technology, joint venture agreements) and regularly advises the company’s Chairman, Presidents, and foreign affiliates.
April 11, 2016
COPYRIGHT, COMPETITION AND THE CONTINENT: THE FUTURE OF TERRITORIAL RIGHTS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
Greg Olsen, Clifford Chance LLP & Ted Shapiro, Wiggin LLP
There is significant change on the European horizon that no copyright lawyer can ignore. The stakes are huge: the European Commission is pursuing potentially far reaching copyright reform as a key ambition within its digital single market (DSM) initiative; legislation on content portability is pending; and the European Commission’s antitrust directorate is pursuing enforcement action against the major Hollywood studios and Sky challenging the terms of certain territorially exclusive copyright licenses. Greg Olsen, a partner at Clifford Chance in London, Ted Shapiro, a partner at Wiggin LLP in Brussels, are deeply involved in the above matters; they will provide their insights on the issues at stake and a roadmap that all IP practitioners – those with primarily domestic and international practices alike – must have to navigate this changing and complex European terrain.
Greg Olsen specializes in EU and UK competition law and violations such as cartels and abuse of market power. He handles regulatory investigations in a diverse range of industries including media and consumer goods. Greg is a committee member and past Chair of the Law Society’s Competition Law Section, has been identified as a leading individual in Legal 500 UK for EU and competition, and has written and spoken extensively on EU competition issues. Ted Shapiro heads Wiggin’s Brussels office. He is a recognized expert in international and European copyright law assisting clients on issues related to policy, litigation, compliance and commercial matters. He joined Wiggin in January 2013 from the Motion Picture Association in Brussels, where he was the General Counsel for Europe. Ted is the co-editor of the book Copyright in the Information Society: A Guide to National Implementation of the European Directive, and he has written numerous articles on copyright issues including on recent judgments of the Court of Justice of the EU.
March 14, 2016
REGISTERING OFFENSE: DISPARAGING TRADEMARKS, THE FIRST AMENDMENT, AND “IN RE SIMON SHIAO TAM”
Ron Coleman, Archer & Greiner, P.C.
Ron Coleman is a partner in Archer & Greiner, P.C.’s New York City and Hackensack, New Jersey offices. Ron’s leading-edge involvement in trademark law and policy has been Ron’s own “trademark” for decades. A leader in social media for lawyers, his blog about copyright, trademark and free speech, LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION®, has since its inception in 2005 become one of the most influential publications in IP law. Ron has represented some of the world’s leading luxury brands in trademark enforcement, litigation, and legislative efforts. He has successfully represented internet businesses facing trademark-based designed to stifle competition or legitimate criticism, and has handled cases throughout the country that have helped shape the law at the intersection of free speech, intellectual property and the internet. Ron has been recognized by the World Trademark Review WTR 1000 and SuperLawyers, and has appeared as a featured speaker on trademark and related issues at INTA, the AIPLA, the Copyright Society of the USA, and many other bar associations and institutes.
February 08, 2016
POW! BOFF! THWACK! WHAT DC COMICS v. TOWLE MEANS FOR COPYRIGHT CHARACTER PROTECTION
James Weinberger, Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C.
James Weinberger is a partner in the litigation group of New York IP boutique Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C., focusing on litigation in the areas of copyright, trademark and trade dress infringement. Recognized by Chambers, Legal 500, Managing Intellectual Property IP Stars and New York SuperLawyers in the areas of copyright and trademark law, James regularly counsels and advises clients across a broad range of industries, including apparel, beverages, cosmetics, film, finance, music, pharmaceuticals, publishing and software on matters relating to intellectual property rights. James has acted in dozens of cases for well-known brands and properties throughout the United States federal courts, as well as lectured on copyright and trademark law for the International Trademark Association, Practicing Law Institute, the Managing Intellectual Property China-International IP Forum and at Columbia Law School.
January 11, 2016
ALL THE OTHER KIDS ARE DOING IT: COPYRIGHT ISSUES IN SOCIAL MEDIA
Judy Jennison, Perkins Coie LLP
Judy is an IP litigation partner with Perkins Coie in Seattle, where her practice focuses on technology and Internet related IP disputes. Her primary area of expertise is in the application of copyright law to software and new technologies. She was lead counsel for the successful search engine defendant in the landmark fair use case Kelly v. Arriba Soft – the first case to address the issue of graphic search engine use of images on the web. She has participated in a number of other leading copyright cases, including Nintendo v. Galoob, Adobe v. Southern Software and MGM v. Grokster. Recruited by Microsoft in 2004, she spent eight years leading its Copyright and Trade Secret Group before returning to Perkins Coie in 2012.
December 14, 2015
THE COPYRIGHT YEAR IN REVIEW: NOT JUST CASES
Professor Doug Lichtman, UCLA School of Law
Professor Lichtman joined the UCLA faculty in 2007, having previously spent ten years teaching and writing at the University of Chicago. His areas of specialty are copyright and patent law, though he also covers a variety of more general legal issues pertaining to technology firms and the Internet. Lichtman’s academic work has been featured in journals including the Journal of Law & Economics, the Yale Law Journal, and the Harvard Business Review. He also writes for mainstream publications like the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times. In addition to his academic pursuits, Mr. Lichtman maintains an active consulting practice, advising Fortune 100 clients on patent and copyright strategy. Mr. Lichtman has undergraduate degrees in electrical engineering and computer science from Duke University, and a JD from Yale Law School. He can be reached via email at firstname.lastname@example.org.
November 09, 2015
HAPPY BIRTHDAY SET FREE: IS A PARTY IN ORDER?
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz
Mark Rifkin is a New York partner of the national law firm Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz. Over thirty years, Mr. Rifkin has tried many complex commercial actions in federal and state courts across the country. He has successfully argued dozens of appeals in many federal appellate courts and in the highest appellate courts in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. Mr. Rifkin has been a New York Super Lawyer® since 2010. In 2014, Mr. Rifkin was named a “Titan of the Plaintiff’s Bar” by Law360®. Mr. Rifkin appears regularly in the media and lectures frequently to business and professional organizations on a variety of shareholder, intellectual property, and commercial matters.
October 12, 2015
THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY: WHEN BANKRUPTCY AND COPYRIGHTS COLLIDE
Marsha A. Houston and Christopher O. Rivas
Reed Smith LLP
Ms. Houston is a partner at Reed Smith LLP and has extensive experience in creditors’ rights matters and the protection of intellectual property rights. She represents entertainment companies, lenders, trustees, creditors, investors, and other clients seeking to protect and enforce their copyright, trademark and license rights in bankruptcy cases and in negotiations with companies that are on the verge of bankruptcy. Her recent representative entertainment cases include: Columbia House (Filmed Entertainment, Inc.); Aramid Entertainment Fund Limited; ThinkFilm, LLC; KSL Media, Inc.; Blockbuster, Inc.; Movie Gallery, Inc.; and Axium International, Inc. Mr. Rivas is an associate at Reed Smith LLP and has broad experience representing creditors in bankruptcy litigation and workout negotiations. He was named a "Rising Star" by Los Angeles Magazine in 2008.
September 21, 2015
THE “BLURRED LINES” TRIAL: WHAT JUST HAPPENED, AND CAN IT BE FIXED?
King, Holmes, Paterno & Soriano
Our first meeting of the 2015-16 term features esteemed litgator Howard King, who represented Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams and T.I. in one of the most notable copyright cases decided in the last year, presenting an (admittedly biased) post-mortem on what happened at trial and how it could impact future copyright litigation and practice. Among other things, Mr. King will address what the jury saw - and didn’t see - before deciding that the defendant’s song “Blurred Lines” infringed the Marvin Gaye composition “Got To Give It Up”; the difficulties of instructing a jury in a music copyright case; the use and misuse of expert witnesses and demonstrative exhibits; the unique challenges of litigating pre 1978 composition copyrights; the need for a clearer legal standard to guide in distinguishing between artistic inspiration and copying; and what is likely to happen in the case on appeal.
Mr. King is managing partner of King, Holmes, Paterno & Soriano and has broad experience representing individuals and companies in all facets of corporate, real estate, music and entertainment law, as well as complex business, real estate, banking, finance, copyright and trademark litigation. He has been named as one of The Hollywood Reporter’s “Power 100 Lawyers in Entertainment,” has been designated a “Super Lawyer” by Super Lawyers magazine, and has been included in the Los Angeles Daily Journal’s list of “California’s Top Entertainment Lawyers.” He received his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of California, Los Angeles.
June 10, 2015
ANNUAL MEMBERS ONLY MEETING
CLOSING PANDORA’S BOX: A PRODUCER’S PERSPECTIVE ON DEFENDING THE AVATAR LITIGATION
Please join us for a special evening with Jon Landau, Academy Award winning producer of Titanic and Avatar, and Matt Belloni, executive editor of The Hollywood Reporter. Mr. Landau will share his personal experience defending and prevailing in the series of Avatar lawsuits, and will participate in a question and answer session moderated by Mr. Belloni.
Avatar, the highest grossing film of all time, has been the subject of numerous high profile copyright and breach of implied contract claims asserted against the producer and distributor of the film. Mr. Landau will discuss the issues raised in these cases, including substantial similarity and independent creation, from the unique perspective he gained while defending these lawsuits.
May 13, 2015
Getting Sirius About Public Performance Rights: the Epic Battle Over Pre-1972 Sound Recordings
Tyler T. Ochoa, Professor of Law, Santa Clara University At this month’s meeting, Professor Ochoa will discuss the ramifications of several recent state and federal court decisions recognizing a right against unauthorized public performance under state law for sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972. If these rulings stand, they will have a significant impact — not only on the music industry — but on film and television studios that produce and distribute content containing pre-1972 sound recordings. Professor Ochoa joined the Santa Clara University School of Law faculty in 2003, where he served as Academic Director of the High Technology Law Institute for the 2005-2006 academic year. He is a recognized expert in copyright law and rights of publicity. Professor Ochoa was awarded his law degree, with distinction, from Stanford University, where he also received his undergraduate degree, with distinction.
At this month’s meeting, Professor Ochoa will discuss the ramifications of several recent state and federal court decisions recognizing a right against unauthorized public performance under state law for sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972. If these rulings stand, they will have a significant impact — not only on the music industry — but on film and television studios that produce and distribute content containing pre-1972 sound recordings.
Professor Ochoa joined the Santa Clara University School of Law faculty in 2003, where he served as Academic Director of the High Technology Law Institute for the 2005-2006 academic year. He is a recognized expert in copyright law and rights of publicity. Professor Ochoa was awarded his law degree, with distinction, from Stanford University, where he also received his undergraduate degree, with distinction.
April 08, 2015
The “Glee Club” Litigation
David Stone, Partner, Simmons & Simmons LLP Comic Enterprises Ltd v Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation: What happens when the popular, long-running US television series, “Glee,” airs in the UK, where a British comic who owns a series of two UK-registered figurative trade marks that feature the words “The Glee Club,” happens to also own comedy clubs with that name? The solicitor and barrister representing Fox will take us through the ensuing litigation, the preliminary ruling and where the case goes from here as we present our annual Axel aus der Muhlen International Lecture. David Stone, Partner, Simmons & Simmons, LLP: David specializes in intellectual property matters, with particular expertise in trademarks, copyright and registered and unregistered designs. David works with large and small clients in a diverse range of industries. A solicitor advocate, David also has the benefit of in house experience, having represented The Coca-Cola Company as Trade Mark Counsel for Western Europe in 2003-2005. David led the team that won the EU Trade Mark and Design Team of the Year at the MIP Awards 2013. In November 2012, David was recognized as the (London) Times Lawyer of the Week. David is a graduate of the universities of Sydney, Oxford and Cambridge. Simon Malynicz, Three New Square: Simon’s practice covers trademarks, passing off, designs, copyright, IT/computer software, media/entertainment, confidential information and patents. He also handles commercial cases with an intellectual property element. He appears regularly before all the relevant tribunals including the High Court, Court of Appeal, Patents Court, Patents County Court, and UK Intellectual Property Office. Simon holds a B.A. (Sydney), M.A. (New School, NY) and LLB (Lond.)
Simon Malynicz, Three New Square
Comic Enterprises Ltd v Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation: What happens when the popular, long-running US television series, “Glee,” airs in the UK, where a British comic who owns a series of two UK-registered figurative trade marks that feature the words “The Glee Club,” happens to also own comedy clubs with that name? The solicitor and barrister representing Fox will take us through the ensuing litigation, the preliminary ruling and where the case goes from here as we present our annual Axel aus der Muhlen International Lecture.
David Stone, Partner, Simmons & Simmons, LLP: David specializes in intellectual property matters, with particular expertise in trademarks, copyright and registered and unregistered designs. David works with large and small clients in a diverse range of industries. A solicitor advocate, David also has the benefit of in house experience, having represented The Coca-Cola Company as Trade Mark Counsel for Western Europe in 2003-2005. David led the team that won the EU Trade Mark and Design Team of the Year at the MIP Awards 2013. In November 2012, David was recognized as the (London) Times Lawyer of the Week. David is a graduate of the universities of Sydney, Oxford and Cambridge.
Simon Malynicz, Three New Square: Simon’s practice covers trademarks, passing off, designs, copyright, IT/computer software, media/entertainment, confidential information and patents. He also handles commercial cases with an intellectual property element. He appears regularly before all the relevant tribunals including the High Court, Court of Appeal, Patents Court, Patents County Court, and UK Intellectual Property Office. Simon holds a B.A. (Sydney), M.A. (New School, NY) and LLB (Lond.)
March 11, 2015
How’s Fair Use “Trending” Online, and Other Copyright “Buzz” in the Interactive Internet
Kelly Klaus Interactive social web sites are proliferating—from BuzzFeed to Instagram to Tumblr to many others. These and other emerging sites are wildly popular, in so small part because they make widespread use of audiovisual and other copyrighted content. The latest generation of internet sites employ a diverse range of postings, including “gifs,” “listicles” and more. How does copyright law apply to such postings when they make use of third-party content? How do the postings implicate the exclusive rights of copyright under Section 106? If there is infringement, is it direct or secondary? And how might the fair use defense apply in this context? This program will explore a variety of copyright issues in this rapidly evolving space. Kelly Klaus is a litigator with Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP. He specializes in copyright and related IP issues. The Daily Journal has named Kelly one of the leading intellectual property lawyers in California. Kelly has represented all of the major motion picture studios and recorded music companies in copyright and related entertainment litigation. Last year, he also represented the NCAA in the O’Bannon antitrust litigation, and Activision in former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega’s right of publicity action. Kelly graduated from UCLA and Stanford Law School. He joined Munger Tolles after clerking for Justice Anthony M. Kennedy on the Supreme Court.
Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP
Interactive social web sites are proliferating—from BuzzFeed to Instagram to Tumblr to many others. These and other emerging sites are wildly popular, in so small part because they make widespread use of audiovisual and other copyrighted content. The latest generation of internet sites employ a diverse range of postings, including “gifs,” “listicles” and more. How does copyright law apply to such postings when they make use of third-party content? How do the postings implicate the exclusive rights of copyright under Section 106? If there is infringement, is it direct or secondary? And how might the fair use defense apply in this context? This program will explore a variety of copyright issues in this rapidly evolving space.
Kelly Klaus is a litigator with Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP. He specializes in copyright and related IP issues. The Daily Journal has named Kelly one of the leading intellectual property lawyers in California. Kelly has represented all of the major motion picture studios and recorded music companies in copyright and related entertainment litigation. Last year, he also represented the NCAA in the O’Bannon antitrust litigation, and Activision in former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega’s right of publicity action. Kelly graduated from UCLA and Stanford Law School. He joined Munger Tolles after clerking for Justice Anthony M. Kennedy on the Supreme Court.
February 11, 2015
College Football Players Tackle the Right of Publicity: O’Bannon v. NCAA and Beyond
Levine Sullivan Koch and Schulz
In O’Bannon, college athletes contend that they have a right of publicity that requires they be compensated whenever their name or image appears in a live broadcast, or re-broadcast, of any game in which they play. Having prevailed at trial against the NCAA, the same class of athletes is now taking aim at television networks, asserting in Marshall v. ESPN that television networks must negotiate with and pay them directly. The media argues that such an outcome would be a dramatic and unconstitutional shift in the definition of publicity rights that would interfere with the media’s ability to air matters of public interest. Many observers believe the dispute could eventually land in the Supreme Court and prompt it to re-visit the modern publicity tort for the first time in four decades. Nathan Siegel represents the media amici in O’Bannon and one of the defendants in Marshall. Nathan is a partner at Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz LLP and represents media clients in First Amendment, intellectual property, and entertainment law cases in trial and appellate courts throughout every region of the country. His diverse practice has included successfully defending ESPN in defamation suits brought by major sports personalities, representing reality television programs such as Dog the Bounty Hunter and Wife Swap in the defense of right of publicity lawsuits, advising The Guardian concerning its reporting about documents released by WikiLeaks, and successfully defending news organizations in novel lawsuits testing the limits of copyright law doctrines such as fair use and equitable estoppel. Nathan also provides pre-broadcast and pre-publication counseling to a wide range of print and web publishers, television networks, and film producers. Nathan received his law degree from Yale Law School and his undergraduate degree from Duke University.
In O’Bannon, college athletes contend that they have a right of publicity that requires they be compensated whenever their name or image appears in a live broadcast, or re-broadcast, of any game in which they play. Having prevailed at trial against the NCAA, the same class of athletes is now taking aim at television networks, asserting in Marshall v. ESPN that television networks must negotiate with and pay them directly. The media argues that such an outcome would be a dramatic and unconstitutional shift in the definition of publicity rights that would interfere with the media’s ability to air matters of public interest. Many observers believe the dispute could eventually land in the Supreme Court and prompt it to re-visit the modern publicity tort for the first time in four decades.
Nathan Siegel represents the media amici in O’Bannon and one of the defendants in Marshall. Nathan is a partner at Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz LLP and represents media clients in First Amendment, intellectual property, and entertainment law cases in trial and appellate courts throughout every region of the country. His diverse practice has included successfully defending ESPN in defamation suits brought by major sports personalities, representing reality television programs such as Dog the Bounty Hunter and Wife Swap in the defense of right of publicity lawsuits, advising The Guardian concerning its reporting about documents released by WikiLeaks, and successfully defending news organizations in novel lawsuits testing the limits of copyright law doctrines such as fair use and equitable estoppel. Nathan also provides pre-broadcast and pre-publication counseling to a wide range of print and web publishers, television networks, and film producers.
Nathan received his law degree from Yale Law School and his undergraduate degree from Duke University.
January 14, 2015
Copyright Law and the First Amendment
Dean of the School of Law, UC Irvine
We will open the new calendar year with a provocative presentation from Erwin Chemerinsky, the Dean of the UC Irvine School of Law. The assumption of copyright law always has been that granting copyright protection will lead to more speech than that which is lost by the restrictions on expression caused by copyright law. But is that true? And should copyright law continue to be based on this assumption? Erwin Chemerinsky is the founding Dean and Distinguished Professor of Law, and Raymond Pryke Professor of First Amendment Law, at the University of California, Irvine School of Law, with a joint appointment in Political Science. Previously, he taught at Duke Law School for four years, during which he won the Duke University Scholar-Teacher of the Year Award in 2006. Before that, he taught for 21 years at the University of Southern California School of Law. Chemerinsky has also taught at UCLA School of Law and DePaul University College of Law. His areas of expertise are constitutional law, federal practice, civil rights and civil liberties, and appellate litigation. He is the author of eight books, most recently The Case Against the Supreme Court, to be published by Viking in September 2014, and more than 200 articles in top law reviews. He frequently argues cases before the nation’s highest courts, including the United States Supreme Court, and also serves as a commentator on legal issues for national and local media. He writes a weekly column for the Orange County Register, monthly columns for the ABA Journal and the Daily Journal, and frequent op-eds in newspapers across the country. In January 2014, National Jurist magazine named Dean Chemerinsky as the most influential person in legal education in the United States. Chemerinsky holds a law degree from Harvard Law School and a bachelor’s degree from Northwestern University.
We will open the new calendar year with a provocative presentation from Erwin Chemerinsky, the Dean of the UC Irvine School of Law. The assumption of copyright law always has been that granting copyright protection will lead to more speech than that which is lost by the restrictions on expression caused by copyright law. But is that true? And should copyright law continue to be based on this assumption?
Erwin Chemerinsky is the founding Dean and Distinguished Professor of Law, and Raymond Pryke Professor of First Amendment Law, at the University of California, Irvine School of Law, with a joint appointment in Political Science. Previously, he taught at Duke Law School for four years, during which he won the Duke University Scholar-Teacher of the Year Award in 2006. Before that, he taught for 21 years at the University of Southern California School of Law. Chemerinsky has also taught at UCLA School of Law and DePaul University College of Law.
His areas of expertise are constitutional law, federal practice, civil rights and civil liberties, and appellate litigation. He is the author of eight books, most recently The Case Against the Supreme Court, to be published by Viking in September 2014, and more than 200 articles in top law reviews. He frequently argues cases before the nation’s highest courts, including the United States Supreme Court, and also serves as a commentator on legal issues for national and local media. He writes a weekly column for the Orange County Register, monthly columns for the ABA Journal and the Daily Journal, and frequent op-eds in newspapers across the country. In January 2014, National Jurist magazine named Dean Chemerinsky as the most influential person in legal education in the United States.
Chemerinsky holds a law degree from Harvard Law School and a bachelor’s degree from Northwestern University.
December 10, 2014
Annual Year in Review - “Not Just Cases”
Doug Lichtman, Professor of Law, UCLA Law School
For our final meeting of the calendar year, UCLA Law Professor Doug Lichtman will lead us through a review of the year's biggest copyright law moments. We will look not only at the key cases, including a few that might have slipped under the radar, but also some of the big decisions that might reverberate with equal force, including CBS's launch of a surprisingly complete online presence, and Taylor Swift's recent decision to pull her music from Spotify. Doug Lichtman is a tenured professor of law at UCLA. He joined the faculty in 2007, having previously spent ten years teaching and writing at the University of Chicago. His areas of specialty are patent and copyright law, though he also covers a variety of more general legal issues pertaining to technology firms and the Internet. Lichtman's academic work has been featured in journals including the Journal of Law & Economics, the Yale Law Journal, and the Harvard Business Review. He also writes for mainstream publications like the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times. In addition to his academic pursuits, Mr. Lichtman maintains an active consulting practice, advising Fortune 100 clients on patent and copyright strategy. Mr. Lichtman has undergraduate degrees in electrical engineering and computer science from Duke University, and a JD from Yale Law School. He can be reached via email at email@example.com.
For our final meeting of the calendar year, UCLA Law Professor Doug Lichtman will lead us through a review of the year's biggest copyright law moments. We will look not only at the key cases, including a few that might have slipped under the radar, but also some of the big decisions that might reverberate with equal force, including CBS's launch of a surprisingly complete online presence, and Taylor Swift's recent decision to pull her music from Spotify.
Doug Lichtman is a tenured professor of law at UCLA. He joined the faculty in 2007, having previously spent ten years teaching and writing at the University of Chicago. His areas of specialty are patent and copyright law, though he also covers a variety of more general legal issues pertaining to technology firms and the Internet. Lichtman's academic work has been featured in journals including the Journal of Law & Economics, the Yale Law Journal, and the Harvard Business Review. He also writes for mainstream publications like the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times. In addition to his academic pursuits, Mr. Lichtman maintains an active consulting practice, advising Fortune 100 clients on patent and copyright strategy. Mr. Lichtman has undergraduate degrees in electrical engineering and computer science from Duke University, and a JD from Yale Law School. He can be reached via email at firstname.lastname@example.org.
November 12, 2014
Getting Creative About Protecting Content: The Future of Anti-Piracy
Ruth Vitale, Executive Director, CreativeFuture
The changing viewing habits of audiences present both challenges and opportunities for today’s artists and filmmakers. The creative industries are finding new ways to provide audiences with high-quality, reliable, and convenient access to creative works. At the same time, the for-profit theft of creative works continues to be a large and growing problem. Ruth Vitale, Executive Director of CreativeFuture, will talk about the challenges of protecting content in today’s ever-evolving global media marketplace. She will address ways that the creative community can speak out about the cultural and economic value of what we do – and can stand up for the fundamental rights of artists and creators to be compensated for their work. Ruth has unique first-hand experience with the grave impact of the piracy of copyrighted works, and of the importance of vigorous content protection. She been at the forefront of independent film production and distribution for more than three decades, including as Founder and Co-President of Paramount Classics and as President of Fine Line Features. Ruth also served as President of UBU Productions’ feature film division, as Senior Vice President of Production for United Artists, and as President of Production for Vestron Pictures. Most recently, Ruth was President of First Look Pictures and the owner of The Film Collective, a consultancy business that helps financiers and companies with the strategic planning for their films in the worldwide marketplace from development and production through distribution. Her films have won three Oscars and received 16 nominations as well as 18 Golden Globe nominations and two wins.
The changing viewing habits of audiences present both challenges and opportunities for today’s artists and filmmakers. The creative industries are finding new ways to provide audiences with high-quality, reliable, and convenient access to creative works. At the same time, the for-profit theft of creative works continues to be a large and growing problem. Ruth Vitale, Executive Director of CreativeFuture, will talk about the challenges of protecting content in today’s ever-evolving global media marketplace. She will address ways that the creative community can speak out about the cultural and economic value of what we do – and can stand up for the fundamental rights of artists and creators to be compensated for their work.
Ruth has unique first-hand experience with the grave impact of the piracy of copyrighted works, and of the importance of vigorous content protection. She been at the forefront of independent film production and distribution for more than three decades, including as Founder and Co-President of Paramount Classics and as President of Fine Line Features. Ruth also served as President of UBU Productions’ feature film division, as Senior Vice President of Production for United Artists, and as President of Production for Vestron Pictures. Most recently, Ruth was President of First Look Pictures and the owner of The Film Collective, a consultancy business that helps financiers and companies with the strategic planning for their films in the worldwide marketplace from development and production through distribution. Her films have won three Oscars and received 16 nominations as well as 18 Golden Globe nominations and two wins.
October 08, 2014
Congress Considers Copyright: Thoughts and Observations About Current Copyright Law and the House Review
A discussion featuring Bob Goodlatte, United States House of Representatives, Virginia, 6th District
Bob Goodlatte represents the Sixth Congressional District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives. In the 113th Congress, he was elected as Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over issues like patents, copyright, trademark law, antitrust matters, and the Internet. In addition to serving in this role, he is the Co-Chairman of the bipartisan Congressional Internet Caucus and the Congressional International Creativity and Theft-Prevention Caucus as well as Chairman of the House Republican Technology Working Group. Chairman Goodlatte has long been a leader in Congress on a number of intellectual property and technology issues, including encryption, piracy prevention, anti-counterfeiting, online service provider copyright liability, high speed data access, privacy, digital signatures, the Internet tax moratorium, Internet gambling, copyright term extension, patent reform, cyber-squatting, class action reform, and spam and spyware prevention. Chairman Goodlatte is the sponsor of the Innovation Act, which takes steps to combat the ever increasing problem of abusive patent litigation. The Innovation Act passed the House of Representatives in December 2013 by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 325-91. He also introduced the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act, which would ban taxes on Internet access. This legislation passed by voice vote in the House in July. Chairman Goodlatte is a graduate of the Washington and Lee University School of Law, and his undergraduate degree in Government was earned at Bates College in Lewiston, Maine. Chairman Goodlatte and his wife, Maryellen, reside in Roanoke and have two adult children.
Bob Goodlatte represents the Sixth Congressional District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives.
In the 113th Congress, he was elected as Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over issues like patents, copyright, trademark law, antitrust matters, and the Internet. In addition to serving in this role, he is the Co-Chairman of the bipartisan Congressional Internet Caucus and the Congressional International Creativity and Theft-Prevention Caucus as well as Chairman of the House Republican Technology Working Group.
Chairman Goodlatte has long been a leader in Congress on a number of intellectual property and technology issues, including encryption, piracy prevention, anti-counterfeiting, online service provider copyright liability, high speed data access, privacy, digital signatures, the Internet tax moratorium, Internet gambling, copyright term extension, patent reform, cyber-squatting, class action reform, and spam and spyware prevention.
Chairman Goodlatte is the sponsor of the Innovation Act, which takes steps to combat the ever increasing problem of abusive patent litigation. The Innovation Act passed the House of Representatives in December 2013 by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 325-91. He also introduced the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act, which would ban taxes on Internet access. This legislation passed by voice vote in the House in July.
Chairman Goodlatte is a graduate of the Washington and Lee University School of Law, and his undergraduate degree in Government was earned at Bates College in Lewiston, Maine.
Chairman Goodlatte and his wife, Maryellen, reside in Roanoke and have two adult children.
September 10, 2014
Controversy Over "The Innocence of Muslims": Breaking Down Garcia v. Google, This Year's Most Controversial Copyright Case and Its Wide-Ranging Implications
On April 14, four members of the Los Angeles Copyright Society, with able assistance from a recent USC graduate, filed an amicus brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on behalf of International Documentary Association, Film Independent, Fredrik Gertten, and Morgan Spurlock in Support of Google, Inc. and Youtube, LLC’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc or, Alternatively, Rehearing.
Gary Bostwick, principal draftsman of the brief, will provide an interactive inside look at the drafting of the brief, with the cooperation of two of the other draftsmen, Jack Lerner and Lincoln Bandlow.
Rom Bar-Nissim, the recently graduated and able former student of Jack Lerner hopefully will also be present to contribute.
The controversy centered around the “Innocence of Muslims”, a film reported to have been the spark setting off flaming rage resulting in riots and the death of a U. S. Ambassador.
Chief Judge Alex Kozinski set the stage in his opening sentence of the 2-1 Ninth Circuit Opinion like this:
“While answering a casting call for a low-budget amateur film doesn’t often lead to stardom, it also rarely turns an aspiring actress into the subject of a fatwa. But that’s exactly what happened to Cindy Lee Garcia when she agreed to act in a film with the working title “Desert Warrior.”
Defendants took down the film.
The presentation will seek to involve the audience in the thinking, research and drafting process of preparing the amicus brief, thereby touching upon the major issues raised and benefitting from the audience’s views of the case. The issues causing the most fire and fervor are distilled one paragraph of the Opinion.
June 11, 2014
Copyright in the Nation's Capital
Featuring Maria A. Pallante, Register of Copyrights of the United States and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office
Maria A. Pallante is Register of Copyrights of the United States and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office, a position she has held since June 1, 2011. Among other duties, Ms. Pallante oversees the legal and administrative aspects of the copyright system, including registration and recordation, and carries out a variety of domestic and international policy activities prescribed by law, including providing expert and impartial advice to Congress and executive branch agencies.
Ms. Pallante was previously in private practice in New York, and earned her J.D. in 1990 from the George Washington University. In the past year, she encouraged Congress to review and update the Copyright Act for the 21st century, and delivered three major lectures on related themes: The Next Great Copyright Act (Columbia University Law School); The Curious Case of Copyright Formalities (Berkeley Center for Law and Technology); and The Next Generation Copyright Office: What it Means and Why it Matters (Copyright Society of the USA).
May 14, 2014
Raging Bull: As Time Goes By
Featuring Glen L. Kulik and Mark A. Perry
The Supreme Court is poised to resolve whether the equitable defense of laches is available in a copyright infringement lawsuit. On January 21, 2014, the Court heard argument in the case of Petrella v. MGM, in which the authors daughter asserts rights to the screenplay for the acclaimed film Raging Bull. The Ninth Circuit held that she waited too long to bring suit, creating a conflict with a Fourth Circuit decision suggesting that laches is not an available defense under the Copyright Act. The Supreme Court will soon decide whether and in what circumstances a copyright defendant may assert laches, and whether or not Ms. Petrellas claim is barred. Two of the attorneys intimately involved in the case Glen Kulik, who argued the case for Ms. Petrella in the Ninth Circuit, and Mark Perry, who argued the case for MGM and Fox in the Supreme Court will discuss the background of the case and its potential ramifications for copyright litigation.
April 09, 2014
Going Foreign: Copyright and the Growth of Overseas Business for U.S. Entertainment Companies
Featuring MAREN CHRISTENSEN & DEAN MARKS
The growth in revenues for many studios and other entertainment companies is coming increasingly from international markets. This presentation will explore some of the international and foreign copyright issues that can impact distribution and production occurring overseas. Our speakers are highly experienced in international copyright, as well as entertaining, and we are fortunate to have them present this years Axel aus der Muhlen Lecture.
March 12, 2014
Recent Developments in Fashion Law
Featuring Sherry Jetter
The Fashion Industry is an ever evolving world of imagination, innovation, creativity and trends. Yet, with its ingenuity, the fashion industry is often said to be sustained by inspiration from the works of others. So, where does inspiration end and copyright infringement begin? This discussion will explore the challenges of copyright protection for designs and fashion-related works, review some news-making incidents at the intersection of fashion and copyright law and provide insight into recent cases involving fashion and their potential implications for copyright in general.
February 12, 2014
LOW TECH, HI TECH TO NO TECH: SELECTED HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE YEAR IN COPYRIGHT LAW
Featuring Professor Jay Dougherty, Loyola Law School
Professor Dougherty will discuss interesting and important copyright and related developments from courts decisions in 2013, particularly those that have not yet been the topic of previous dinner presentations. From Sherlock developments to lip dubs, red flags, old records rock concert sets and classic pop tunes, Rasta appropriation, stick figures, the Batmobile, wanted photos, terminations, electronic transfers of copyright, the exciting concept of laches and more& The year that was is never more fun than in the world of copyright, its denizens and their neighbors!
January 07, 2014
CAMBRIDGE v. BECKER (The Georgia State University Case):
The Most Important Educational Copyright Case In A Generation
Featuring TONY ASKEW AND STEVE SCHAETZEL, Meunier Carlin & Curfman, LLC
The ability to make fair use of materials in the educational context is fundamental; the doctrine enjoys a special place in terms of scholarship, research, criticism, comment and teaching. As a result, the educational environment constitutes a leading edge for consideration of fair use issues. In a case just argued before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, such fair use issues took center stage as three publishers appealed an District Court decision largely upholding the E-reserves policy of the University System of Georgia as implemented by Georgia State University. The ultimate ruling in this case will have ramifications for rights holders and users across the United States, both inside and outside of the educational environment.
Tony Askew and Steve Schaetzel represented the University System of Georgia in this now multi-year litigation. They will provide a recap of the Georgia State case, offer insights as to how recent leading decisions such as Google Books and Hathitrust influence the Georgia State case and current thinking in fair use, and they will explore the ramifications that this case could have for practitioners across the entire spectrum of copyright.
December 11, 2013
ITS A BIRD, ITS A PLANE, ITS . . . AN END TO THE SUPERMAN LITIGATION?
Featuring Daniel Petrocelli, OMelveny & Myers
The Los Angeles Copyright Society is proud to present an in-depth look at the copyright battle of the century, by one of todays top trial lawyers.
On November 21 of this year, the 9th Circuit effectively ended decades of litigation over who owns the copyrights relating to Superman. It affirmed summary judgment in favor of DC Comics parent company Warner Bros., holding that a 2003 termination notice filed by the nephew of Superman co-creator Joe Shuster was invalid due to a 1992 agreement between Shusters heirs and DC. This decision was the latest in a string of dramatic legal developments, including a 9th Circuit ruling last January dismissing similar claims by the heirs of Shusters co-creator Jerry Siegel, and seems finally to establish Warner Bros. as the sole owner of Superman.
Dan Petrocelli of OMelveny & Myers has represented Warner Bros. in these cases and will provide a first-hand account of this important litigation. He will address the various trial and appellate decisions and what they mean for copyright practitioners in a market hungry to adapt comic books and other preexisting works into movies, television shows and digital content.
November 13, 2013
STREAMING VIA THE PUBLIC AEREO-WAVES: A NEW TECHNOLOGY GOES OLD SCHOOL
Featuring Paul M. Smith & Doug Lichtman
Some of the most cutting-edge and controversial new issues of copyright law have been raised by the creation of the Aereo service and its imitator FilmOn X. These services receive broadcast television signals and retransmit them to users on request over the Internet. When an order is placed, they say they use a separate mini-antenna for each user and create a separate copy for that user on the server before transmitting. Equally cutting-edge and somewhat related issues have been raised by the Dish Network's "Prime Time Anytime" service, which records prime-time network programming to a subscriber's DVR and allows later viewing with the commercials automatically skipped.
October 09, 2013
What Will the Next Copyright Act Look Like?
Featuring Fred von Lohmann (Legal Director, Copyright | Google Inc.)
The Copyright Act of 1976 is beginning to show its age, despite updates like 19982s Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Both the Register of Copyright and the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee have begun the discussion about what The Next Great Copyright Act should look like. It seems clear that the digital online environment will be at the center of the upcoming statutory overhaul of the Act. How do we craft a Copyright Act that is forward-looking, that encourages both creativity and innovation, and that meets the needs of millions of new creators who depend on the Internet for both inspiration and distribution?
September 11, 2013
RIGHTS OF PUBLICITY v. THE FIRST AMENDMENT: FROM HUMAN CANNONBALLS TO VIDEOGAMES
Kelli L. Sager of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP speaks on Hart v. Electronic Arts, Third Circuit, Keller v. Electronic Arts, et al., Ninth Circuit and James Brown v. Electronic Arts, Ninth Circuit decisions all decided recently relating to the right of publicity, Lanham Act claims and First Amendment defenses and SLAPP motions in connection with entertainment products.
September 11, 2013
September LACS Meeting: Guest TBA
September LACS Meeting: Guest TBA
June 04, 2013
Copyright at a Crossroads: The View from Washington
Senator Christopher Dodd Chairman MPAA
May 08, 2013
AN HISTORIC STRUGGLE OVER RIGHTS TO HISTORICAL CHARACTERS How One Sherlockian Is Taking on the Conan Doyle Estate
Jonathan Kirsch, author and publishing attorney, is the lead intellectual property counsel on Les Klinger’s legal team. Klinger is a prominent Los Angeles attorney, expert on the Sherlock Holmes Canon, and author of numerous works about Sherlock Holmes.He is also the plaintiff in a newly-filed civil action now pending in U.S. District Court in Northern Illinois against the Conan Doyle Estate. He will reprise the leading cases on character protection and discuss the origins and status of Klinger v. Conan Doyle Estate, LLC, a saga with all the twists and turns of a Sherlock Holmes story but one that stands on the cutting edge of character protection under copyright and trademark law.
April 10, 2013
Aaron Moss and Ken Basin: Termination Salvation: Do Artists Who Use Loan-Out Corporations Say Hasta La Vista to Their Termination Rights?
On January 1, 2013, the first generation of copyright transfers made under the 1976 Copyright Act became eligible for statutory termination, enabling creators of copyrighted properties and their heirs to unwind their own transactions and reacquire potentially valuable rights to long-since transferred works. As recent headlines involving marquee properties such as James Camerons The Terminator and the Village Peoples Y.M.C.A. have made clear, the implications for successful, enduring franchises created after 1978 could be dramatic.
March 13, 2013
Simon J. Frankel: A Night at the Museum: IP Battles in the World of Fine Art
February 13, 2013
It’s Crazy in Canada: A Copyright Blizzard
January 09, 2013
Copyright Year in Review: Looking Back at 2012 and What to Look For in 2013
December 12, 2012
Battlefield Conditions?: A State-of-the-Nation Report on the Right of Publicity
November 14, 2012
The Knockoff Economy
September 12, 2012
Fashion Weak? Copyright and the Fall Line
June 13, 2012
The View of Circle C from DC
May 09, 2012
The New Consensus on Digital Theft and Counterfeiting
April 11, 2012
Jan Bernd Nordemann
Axel aus der Muhlen lecture on International Law: See You in the EU - Finding Common Ground in European Copyright Law
March 14, 2012
Hope and Obey: A Copyright Fairey Tale
February 08, 2012
From Seven Dirty Words to Fleeting Expletives and Wardrobe Malfunctions – Where Are We Now?
January 11, 2012
An Empirical Study of Fair Use Cases, 1978-2011 – And What It Means for Copyright Practitioners
December 14, 2011
2011 Year in Review: Recent Developments in Copyright and Media Law
November 09, 2011
This is Not My Beautiful House!: How Can We Have An Information Economy If All Content is Free?
October 12, 2011
We'll Just Have To 504© About That: The Limewire Case And Statutory Damages In Mass Infringement Cases
September 14, 2011
Jonathan Zavin and David Grossman
Kung-Fu Panda Fighting: The Kung-Fu Panda Case, Terence Dunn v. Dreamworks Animation
June 08, 2011
A Copyright System for the 21st Century: One That Would Work
May 11, 2011
Mira T. Sundara Rajan
Axel aus der Muhlen Memorial Lecture on International Law: The Story of the Moral: The Case for Bringing International Moral Rights to the U.S.
April 13, 2011
Gail Migdal Title and Joel R. Weiner
The Future of Idea Submission Claims and the Copyright Preemption Doctrine: Montz v. Pilgrim Films (discussing the Grosso and Montz cases).
March 09, 2011
Farewell Frequent Flyer Filings: The Legislative Response to Libel Tourism
February 09, 2011
Edward H. Rosenthal and Maura J. Wogan
Catcher in the Wry: Parody, Fair Use, and Injunctions in the World of Literature
January 12, 2011
Aaron Moss and Lincoln Bandlow
First Sale Fail: Supreme Court Deadlocks in Omega v. Costco; Now What?
December 08, 2010
Bob Clarida and Thomas Kjellberg
Current Developments in Copyright
November 10, 2010
Don Johnson Productions v. Rysher Entertainment: New Risks at the Intersection of Copyright and Profit Participation
October 13, 2010
Judge Alex Kozinski and Louis Petrich
A View From the Bridge: Navigating Through Recent Copyright, Right of Publicity and Trademark Rulings in the Ninth Circuit and the United States Supreme Court
September 14, 2010
Cliff Sloan and Michael Kwun
Viacom Dios: What the District Court's Dismissal Of Viacom's Lawsuit Against YouTube Means And What Happens Next
June 09, 2010
Prof. Doug Lichtman
Shoot the Messenger
May 12, 2010
Keith Ashby and Peter McInerney
Axel aus der Muhlen Memorial Lecture on International Law: Are You Okay in the UK? An Update on Online Piracy, Formats, Privacy and Defamation Law Across the Pond
April 14, 2010
Lee Phillips and Eric Custer
Music Rights Terminators: They'll Be Back
March 10, 2010
James Juo and Scott Hansen
Three Ways to Skin a Copycat: How Design Patents Overlap with Copyright and Trade Dress
February 10, 2010
Erika Solti Shaeffer, Slyvie Maracci and Elena Muravina
Copyright Issues in International Productions: a panel discussion
January 13, 2010
Whether a Rolling Stone Will Gather No Loss: A Rock N' Roll Tribute Meets a Right of Publicity Class Action
December 09, 2009
Bob Clarida and Tom Kjellberg
Current Developments In Copyright
November 11, 2009
Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick: A View From The Trenches
October 13, 2009
Knockoffs and Fashion Victims: Why We Don't Need a Design Piracy Protection Act
September 09, 2009
Is Amazon Watching?: The First Sale Doctrine In the Age of eBooks and Movie Downloads
June 03, 2009
John Schulman and Jeremy Williams
Holding On And Letting Go
May 13, 2009
Copyright Protection On The Internet – A European Challenge: The Struggle Against The PirateBay or How Sweden Became An Internet Piracy Haven
April 01, 2009
April Fools! Plaintiff Wins Fair Use Trial, But Defendant Is Publishing A New Manuscript Anyway!: Recent Developments In Fair Use And Free Expression
March 11, 2009
Inspector Clouseau, Clark Kent and Lassie Walk Into A Courtroom: Terminating Copyright Transfers – Recent Case Law Developments
February 11, 2009
Janis C. Nelson and Prof. Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Trouble in River City: Ethics in Entertainment Practice. A Conversation with Janis C. Nelson, Esq. and Prof. Carrie Menkel-Meadow
January 14, 2009
Copyright (and Media too) Year In Review
December 03, 2008
Michael S. Elkin
Io v. Veoh: Application of DMCA Safe Harbors to UGC Sites
November 06, 2008
Living in a World of User Digital Distribution: The UGC Principles – a Case Study
September 10, 2008
Exploding the Inverse Ratio Rule
May 07, 2008
Control Of Public Domain Images And Other Intersections of Copyright And Contract
April 02, 2008
Has The Worm Turned: Personal Managers and Procuring Employment – Recent Developments Under The Talent Agency Act
March 05, 2008
Copyright Or Copywrong: The Top Ten Worst Copyright Decisions
December 05, 2007
Professor Neil Netanel
Copyright Developments: What Happened in 2007 and What to Expect in 2008
November 07, 2007
It's (Not) The Same Old Song: Music Rights In A Digital Age
October 03, 2007
Copyright & Technology: Legal, Political and Market Challenges. A View From WIPO
September 11, 2007
Jeff Mausner, Andrew Bridges & Jay Spillane
Recent Important Cases Involving Secondary Liability, Fair Use, The DMCA and Right of Publicity: Perfect 10 v. Google, Visa and CCBill
June 06, 2007
Fred von Lohmann
Developing Dolphin-Safe DMCA Takedowns: Responsibly Policing User-Generated Content
May 02, 2007
Charles Alexander & Carolyn Dalton
3rd Axel aus der Mühlen Memorial Lecture On International Law Copyright Reform Australian Style: Recent Developments and Emerging Copyright Reform Issues Down Under
April 04, 2007
Anthony Falzone & Michael Donaldson
Creative Coverage: Documentary Film Makers Get New "Fair Use Insurance" – How Much Do They Need It?
March 07, 2007
Scandalous Notes: Applying The New Musical Reality To Film And Television Music
February 07, 2007
The Dilution Solution? Implications of Recent Amendments to the Trademark Statute
January 10, 2007
Professor Neil Netanel
2006 – Copyright Year in Review
January 09, 2007
Injunctive Relief in Copyright Cases: Not So Fast
December 06, 2006
Neville Johnson, Gerald Weiner
The Music Download Class Action Suits
November 01, 2006
Glen Kulik & Lou Petrich
Plenty More Plaintiffs Pursuing Purloined Pitches?: The Status And Future Of Idea Submission Law Post-Grosso
October 04, 2006
The Book Review And The Fair-Used Photo: A Case Study In Trying Section 107 To A Jury
September 13, 2006
Termination of Transfers after the Winnie The Pooh Case
June 07, 2006
A Conversation with William Patry about Fair Use
May 03, 2006
Carole Handler & Jimmy Nguyen
The Medium is the Message: How New Media Technologies Will Transform Copyright Protection and Limits
April 05, 2006
Christoph Wagner and Winston Maxwell
2nd Axel aus der Mühlen Memorial Lecture On International Law Recent Copyright Law Developments in France and Germany
March 11, 2006
L.A.C.S. Conference at La Costa Resort
Speaker and Recipient of Lifetime Achievement Award, Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights. Other speakers: David O. Carson, David Nimmer, Jeff Mausner, Robert Clarida, Lionel S. Sobel, Stacey Byrnes, Mark Roesler, Prof. J. Dougherty and Susan Aslan
February 08, 2006
Professor David Kohler
Sending Central Hudson Down The River: What Abandoning The "Commercial Speech" Test Would Mean For Advertising And Right Of Publicity Law
January 11, 2006
Robert Schwartz and Josh Wattles
Grokster: The Case, The Holding, The Future
December 07, 2005
Lou Petrich and Robert H.Rotstein
The Use of Marks in Movies and the Impact of Parody
November 02, 2005
Crystals, Pixels and Light: The Curious Case of Mannion v. Coors
September 14, 2005
Music Machinations: The Changing Landscape Of The Statutory Licenses for Musical Works and Sound Recordings
May 04, 2005
Codifying Copyright Comprehensibly
April 13, 2005
Lawrence Heller & Eric Stockel
That, and $15 Million, Will Get You a Jar of Coffee: A Discussion of the Recent Nestle Right of Publicity Case
March 02, 2005
Glen A. Bloom
1st Axel aus der Mühlen Memorial Lecture On International Law: Recent Developments in Canadian Copyright Law and the On-Going Shifts in the Canada/US IP law divide
February 02, 2005
Your Karma Ran Over My Dogma: Issues in Copyright Protection for Yoga Sequences, Sports Plays and Choreography
January 12, 2005
Jo-Ellen Dimitrius, Ph.D.
Jury Selection In Intellectual Property / Privacy / Publicity Cases
December 01, 2004
David Lyle & David Shall
All About Formats
November 03, 2004
Robert H. Rotstein
Digital Video Recorders and the Law of Copyright
October 06, 2004
Lou Petrich and Lincoln Bandlow.
Recent cases involving Copyright and the Right of Privacy: Bochco and Gates
September 06, 2004
Michael D. Lewis
Legal Issues Concerning Creation and Licensing of Content Distributed On-Line and Wirelessly
May 05, 2004
Richard B. Kendall
April 14, 2004
Professor Eugene Volokh
Freedom of Speech and Intellectual Property: A Survey of Some Important Remaining Questions
March 03, 2004
Trademark, Copyright And Other Challenges To Props/ Background Scenery in Film
February 04, 2004
Recent UK and European Developments in Copyright and Neighboring Rights
January 07, 2004
David Halberstadter & Harrison Dossick
Professional Responsibilities of Outside and Corporate Counsel in the Entertainment Industry
December 03, 2003
George Borkowski and Michael Page
The Grokster/Kaaza/Aimster litigation
November 05, 2003
The Enforceability of Shrinkwrap/Clickwrap Agreements
October 01, 2003
Douglas E. Mirell
Worming Around the First Amendment: An Overview of Recent Developments in Publicity Rights Litigation
September 10, 2003
Bruce E. H. Johnson & Kelli Sager
The Nike v. Kasky Case
June 04, 2003
Marybeth Peters, US Register of Copyrights
What Can you Legally Use Without Paying For It?
May 07, 2003
Plagiarism Revisited: Current issues relating to plagiarism such as passing off, reverse passing off, and violation of the claimed right of attribution
April 10, 2003
Copyright & Trademark: The Year in Review
March 05, 2003
Moral Rights 10+ Years After The Asphalt Jungle Case: Still a jungle?
February 05, 2003
Copyright Ownership and Separated Rights
November 06, 2002
Eldred v. Ashcroft: The Challenge to the 20-Year Copyright Extension
October 02, 2002
Trademark and the First Amendment: Fred and Ginger dance into the Ninth Circuit
September 04, 2002
Washington and Hollywood: Proposed copyright legislation and its potential effects on the entertainment industry
May 01, 2002
Do you Believe in Magic?: IP Protection for Magic and Illusions
April 03, 2002
Stephen F. Rohde
Kidnapping the Son of Sam Law: A Victory for the First Amendment or a Defeat for Victims' Rights?
March 06, 2002
The European Civil Law (A Different Legal Tradition): How & Why It Differs from Common Law
February 06, 2002
Use of the anti-SLAPP Statute in Media Litigation
January 09, 2002
Creative Accounting in the Entertainment Industry: How to Follow the Money
December 05, 2001
P.T. Barnum Redux: Tales in Building a Billion Dollar Brand.
November 07, 2001
Royalties from Abroad
October 03, 2001
Joel McCabe Smith
Silver Screen Stars, Stooges and Surfers: California's Right of Publicity Law in the aftermath of Hoffman, Saderup and Abercrombie
September 05, 2001
Henry J. Tashman
Statutory Damages in Copyright Cases: Constitutionality and Application by the Courts and Juries
May 02, 2001
Copycat Crime Litigation and the First Amendment: A Review of the Natural Born Killers Case
April 04, 2001
When Intellectual Property Rights Restrict Competition — The interface of antitrust, trademark and copyright law
March 07, 2001
Donald S. Passman
Music Update: Challenges in the Digital Age"
February 07, 2001
Copyright, Trademark and the Scope of the Fair use Parody Defense: Columbia Pictures v. TeeVeeToons
January 03, 2001
Russell J. Frackman
A&M Records vs. Napster: Or How I Spent My Summer Vacation
December 06, 2000
Siva Vaidhyanathan, Ph.D., Professor, NYU
The End of Copyright: Technology and the Threat to the Information Commons
November 01, 2000
What Every Good Entertainment Lawyer Needs to Know about Bankruptcy
October 04, 2000
Jon A. Baumgarten
Cease and DeCSS'd: The DVD Encryption Case in the Broader Context of New Technology and the Protection of Motion Picture Copyrights
September 06, 2000
Ian C. Ballon
Fair Use in Cyberspace
May 03, 2000
Recent Developments in the Law of Entertainment Lawyering: Cautionary Tales about Letter-Writing (Cease-and-Desist, Opinion, Settlement Confirmation, and Conflict Waiver), Sanctions, Fees Malpractice, Lawyers as Private Investigators, and Messing with Don Engel
April 05, 2000
Joseph M. Beck
The cases of Estate of Martin Luther King Jr. v. CBS and Rosa Parks v. LaFace: Civil Rights heroes, Copyright, Fair Use, The First Amendment and "Symbolic Conflicts"
March 01, 2000
Ed Labowitz, Stephanie Lieser
Moral Rights – An International Perspective
February 02, 2000
Los Angeles Times and Washington Post v. Free Republic: Fair Use and Freedom of Speech
January 05, 2000
Music Rights in the Digital Age – They Aren't What You Think They Are
December 01, 1999
Kathryn A. Young
Using Trademarks in Film: Is it Worth the Risk?
November 03, 1999
Mark Flagel and Dan Shecter
Why Worry About Patents? (After all My Client has Never Been Injured by a Stealth Bomber)
October 06, 1999
Creation of Entertainment Content for the Internet
September 08, 1999
Of Laws and Sausage: The Right of Publicity in Sacramento
December 02, 1998
Recent Developments in Fair Use and Copyright Issues: Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc. v. Carol Publishing Group, Inc.
November 04, 1998
Roger L. Mayer
The Legal and Practical Consequences of Film Preservation (or the Lack Thereof!)
October 07, 1998
Kelli L. Sager
Recent Developments in Misappropriation and Right of Publicity Law
September 09, 1998
Professor Eugene Volokh
Copyright Law and the First Amendment's Procedural Rules
April 01, 1998
The Spider In The Web: The Top 10 Ways To Get Stung With A Website
October 08, 1997
Harvey E. Harrison
A Declaration of Independence – The Call for Legislative Abolition of Most Exclusivity Provisions in Employment Agreements in the Entertainment Industry
April 02, 1997
Copyright Protection for Creations of Nonhumans: Celestial Beings, Chimpanzees and Computers.