In this week’s episode, Scott Hervey and Josh Escovedo discuss the complex process of clearing titles for Film and Television. They cover recent high-stakes litigation around entertainment titles, including Stouffer v. National Geographic Partners LLC, Jon Astor-White v. Daniel Strong (Empire), and the “Honey Badger” case. Continue Reading The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: What’s in a Name: Clearing Titles for Film and Television
In U.S. v. Arthrex, case number 19-1434; Smith & Nephew v. Arthrex, case number 19-1452; and Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew, case number 19-1458, the Supreme Court of the United States recently held that Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) judges are unconstitutionally appointed. But, the Court also held that providing the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) with more oversight over PTAB rulings will remedy the unconstitutionality of the PTAB judges.
Continue Reading Supreme Court Finds PTAB Judges Unconstitutional
I’m experiencing déjà vu. I wrote about a similar topic prior to Allegiant Air becoming the official sponsor of the Las Vegas stadium that the Raiders now call home. In fact, I covered the topic at a time when Allegiant Air claimed that it was not involved in any negotiations for the naming rights of any professional sports facilities despite having filed an application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office for use of Allegiant in connection with stadium or training facilities.
Continue Reading Will Starbucks Become the Next Corporate Sponsor of a Professional Sports Facility?
New York’s post mortem right-of-publicity statute recently came into effect. Its previous right-of-publicity laws were an extension of its statutory right of privacy which provided that “any person whose name [or likeness] is used within [New York] for advertising [or trade] purposes without . . . written consent” can sue for an injunction and damages. Because the statute addressed privacy concerns that dissipated at death, such rights did not extend post mortem. New York courts have held that because the state’s law affords no common law right of publicity – the statutory grant is exclusive.
Continue Reading I See Dead People…Filing Lawsuits In New York
We recently wrote about a case in the Southern District of New York against Mashable relating to the embedding of content from social media platforms like Instagram. In that case, the court held that Instagram’s terms of use (which were accepted by the plaintiff, a photographer, when he created an Instagram account) were insufficiently clear to allow Mashable to escape liability for publishing Instagram content through the process of embedding. Thereafter, the parties settled out of court. Legal watchers speculated that the ruling would encourage copyright infringement claims based on the embedding of content.
