Greetings From Lawyersville
Barry Skidelsky, Chair of the NYSBA Entertainment, Arts & Sports Law Section, writes: If you cannot attend our Section's program and/or joint networking reception with the Intellectual Property Section, here is a brief introduction to what copyright law calls “derivative works” (plus mention of a related lawsuit doubling as a warning for podcasters and others).
January 11, 2019 at 11:16 AM
3 minute read
Yes, that's a real place in New York state—as already known at least by my colleagues in NYSBA's Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Section (EASL), and by readers of the recent EASL Journal special edition celebrating the Section's 30th anniversary.
EASL's 2019 annual meeting program at the Hilton (Tuesday, January 15) will include CLE panels addressing legal ethics for entertainment and other lawyers, plus various transactional, litigation and regulatory matters concerning underlying rights and adaptations in multiple media.
If you cannot attend our program and/or joint networking reception with the Intellectual Property Section (EASL loves to cross-pollinate with other NYSBA sections, bar associations, and law firms), here is a brief introduction to what copyright law calls “derivative works” (plus mention of a related lawsuit doubling as a warning for podcasters and others).
The Copyright Act defines derivative works as those based on or adapted from one or more pre-existing works. Traditional and obvious examples include sound recordings based on a musical composition (i.e., the music and lyrics of a song), and motion pictures or theatrical plays based on a previously published book. More modern and less obvious examples are podcasts, apps and websites. All involve multiple works and underlying rights that must be “cleared.” Failure to do so upfront increases risks and costs.
The right to create derivative works (and to prohibit others from creating them) is part of a bundle of exclusive rights a copyright holder has which arise when a work of original authorship is fixed in tangible form (including as MP3 and other digital media files). Copyright registration is not required, but is generally recommended to obtain added value, statutory damages and counsel fees.
Related lawsuits (often at federal and state courts in New York and California, where many entertainment, media and technology matters are litigated) have followed the emergence and adoption of each new media technology.
A chronological list of some relevant traditional media technology well developed over the last century includes printed sheet music, mechanical piano player rolls, film, sound recordings, radio, television, and home video recorders. Newer online and mobile digital media technologies that emerged over the last couple of decades continue to develop and supplant at an accelerated pace, creating global opportunities and challenges.
Legislators and judges struggle to adapt copyright and other law to emerging digital media. Consider the recently enacted Music Modernization Act (music licensing reform primarily promoted by large streaming services), and UMG v. iBus Media (case no. 2:18-cv-9709, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, filed Nov. 16, 2018).
UMG is one of the first nationally prominent cases concerning podcasts. Various record labels and music publishers sued the owner of pokernews.com for willful copyright infringement relating to unauthorized use of music in the defendant's poker related podcasts. Given statutory damages of $150,000 per infringed work, the total tab could easily exceed $6 million. Space constraints here aside, more information is available at nysba.org/easl.
Barry Skidelsky has experience as a musician, broadcaster, bankruptcy trustee, FCC trustee, arbitrator, and general counsel. Based in New York City, he currently owns a national consulting and legal practice with particular interests and expertise in media, entertainment, communications and technology.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250