Property, intangible

In an earlier post I asked whether a written agreement allowing the creation of a “Sequel” assigned the copyright in the original season of a telenovela, referred to as “the Series.” Caracol argued that the writing wasn’t a clear and unambiguous transfer of the rights in the Series, particularly since other parts of the agreement… Continue reading

In writing about control of the social media accounts used by wedding dress designer and defendant Hayley Paige during her now-terminated employment with JLM Couture, the court outlined the following areas of dispute: JLM and Gutman agree that the Disputed Accounts are property belonging to one of them, but they disagree vigorously about whose accounts… Continue reading

Caracol Television, S.A. and Telemundo Television Studios co-created a telenovela called “El Señor de los Cielos,” referred to as “the Series.” The parties agreed that if either party wanted to create a derivative work, i.e., another season, the other would have the option to become a co-producer. Telemundo wanted to make another season of the… Continue reading

The main lesson here is be careful who you go into business with, or at least have an agreement that keeps them from backstabbing you. Defendant William Brady was the president of a company called Xponential, Inc. d/b/a EKR. EKR was a consulting firm that assisted startups with business strategy, marketing, creative services, and technology… Continue reading

There’s something that doesn’t seem right about this case, but then it’s a band case. Those are in their own trademark world. This one is about The Rascals. The original members of The Rascals (originally known as The Young Rascals), formed in 1965, were Felix Cavaliere, Gene Cornish, Eddie Brigati and Dino Danelli: (Dig the… Continue reading

The Copyright Act gives a great deal of power to the original creators of works. For works created after 1977, the original author of a work can terminate any grant of rights roughly between 35 and 40 years after the date of the grant and provided that at least two years’ notice of the termination… Continue reading

This is a litigation strategist’s dream. I don’t think the outcome is right, but I will say it was really excellent lawyering. Plaintiff Business Moves Consulting, Inc. owns a trademark registration for: for a long list of clothing items. It sued Collegiate Licensing Company, LLC and others for trademark infringement.1 CLC is a licensing agent… Continue reading

July 7, 2020: Updated to add footnote 2. Section 32 of the Lanham Act is for infringement of registered trademarks. The section says that the liability for infringement is to the “registrant.” That category undisputedly includes a successor-in-interest, such as an assignee. A minority of courts have also held that “registrant” encompasses an exclusive licensee,… Continue reading

This is a situation I don’t recall seeing before, but perhaps that is because it took some chutzpah to make the argument. At any rate, the decision covers some interesting legal history. The decision is about is security interests. In Raffel Systems LLC v. Man Wah Holdings Ltd. Inc., the plaintiff-patentee had granted security interests… Continue reading

I read the headlines about Johnson v. Nike with passing surprise, because the case was decided of on a motion to dismiss. The designs aren’t that different and what crossed my brief attention led me to think that it was a copyright infringement case about the similarity of these two designs: But it is really… Continue reading