We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 138

Siegel, et al. v. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., et al.

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 19 2009

District court holds that plaintiffs, heirs of one of the co-creators of the Superman character, successfully terminated certain prior grants in copyrights and recaptured the rights to several Superman-related works from the 1930s and 40s, including portions of Superman comic books and two weeks’ worth of daily newspaper strips; however, the court ruled that the remaining Superman material at issue in the litigation was created as a work made for hire under the Copyright Act of 1909, and that ownership of such material remains solely with defendants

Bridgeport Music, Inc, et al v UMG Recordings, Inc, et al

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 11 2009

Sixth Circuit affirms a jury verdict which found defendants willfully infringed plaintiff’s musical composition copyright; court rejects defendants’ argument that district court erred in jury instructions about substantial similarity, fair use and willful infringement

Ladd v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 2 2010

The California Court of Appeal holds that Warner Bros breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing owed to plaintiff, Alan Ladd Jr, a profit participant in several movies, when it allocated the same share of licensing fees to every movie in packages of films regardless of each movie's value

Jordan v. Sony BMG Music Entertainment Inc., et al

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 16 2009

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals holds that plaintiff was time-barred under the Copyright Act from suing for co-ownership of defendant’s copyright because more than three years had elapsed since defendant registered with the Copyright Office; court also holds that the copyright registration solely in defendant’s name was sufficient to put the plaintiff on constructive notice that defendant claimed sole ownership in the work

Experience Hendrix, L.L.C. v. Hendrixlicensing.com, LTD

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 16 2011

In a case regarding Jimi Hendrix’s right of publicity, the court found that the choice-of-law provisions of the Washington Personality Rights Act directing the application of Washington law regardless of the law of the domicile of the individual at the time of death was arbitrary and unfair, and declared the provisions unconstitutional

The Weinstein Company v. Smokewood Entertainment Group, LLC

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 7 2009

In a breach of contract action, the district court grants defendant producer’s motion to dismiss claims by The Weinstein Company, holding that parties’ oral negotiations for licensing and distribution rights to the motion picture Push, allegedly confirmed by an email exchange, do not constitute a writing that satisfies Section 204 of the Copyright Act

Schrock v. Learning Curve International, Inc, et al

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 11 2009

Seventh Circuit holds that (1) derivative works are not held to a higher level of originality in order to be copyrighted, and (2) so long as the author of the derivative work had permission to create the derivative work, that author did not need separate permission to obtain a copyright registration for the derivative work

Dunn v. DreamWorks Animation SKG, Inc.

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 10 2013

California Court of Appeal affirms judgment in favor of defendant DreamWorks Animation on plaintiff’s breach of implied-in-fact contract claim

Cohen v. G&M Realty L.P.

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 27 2013

In matter of first impression, district court denies preliminary injunction under federal Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) to graffiti artists

Valley Entertainment, Inc. v. Friesen, et al

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 24 2010

District court grants defendants’ motion for summary judgment and motion to strike newly disclosed copyright registration where plaintiff record label initially relied on a copyright registration covering only the words and arrangement of sheet music in its infringement claim premised on the copying of sound recordings, and first disclosed that it obtained a copyright registration for sound recordings at issue in response to defendants’ motion for summary judgment