Showing posts with label public relations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label public relations. Show all posts

Friday, February 7, 2020

Disney CEO apologizes after elementary school is fined for Lion King showing; The Verge, February 6, 2020

, The Verge; Disney CEO apologizes after elementary school is fined for Lion King showing

"Movie Licensing USA, a licensing firm that works with Disney and a number of other companies, sent an email to Emerson Elementary, letting it know the firm was alerted to the PTA’s screening, and the school was facing a $250 fine as a result for showing a movie for which it didn’t have the licensing rights. The email, which was obtained by CNN, noted that “any time a movie is shown outside of the home, legal permission is needed to show it, as it is considered a Public Performance.”...

There are a number of unanswered questions. How did Movie Licensing USA even find out about the event? Who alerted the company to a small fundraising event, which led the firm to take action? Disney is notorious for its copyright takedown strategy, but it’s usually over parts of its movies ending up on YouTube or other hosting sites or merchandise using characters from its properties — not a fundraising event where a movie purchased by a local father was shown. 

At least Iger is trying to rectify the situation. But it doesn’t answer any of the questions listed above. The Verge has reached out to Disney and Movie Licensing USA for more information."

Monday, February 19, 2018

From Taco Tuesday to Sunday Brunch, restaurants fight over trademarks; National Post, February 19, 2018

Joseph Brean, National Post; From Taco Tuesday to Sunday Brunch, restaurants fight over trademarks

"News that a large restaurant franchise conglomerate has threatened a small Tex-Mex cantina in Calgary with a lawsuit for illegally using the trademark “Taco Tuesday” has shone a rare light into the murky world of intellectual property law for foodies.

It is a brutal world, in which even the most basic culinary gimmick has probably already been claimed and protected by unforgiving law, from the “Ham N’ Egger” to “Eggs Benny.”"

Saturday, April 1, 2017

Uber Executive Invokes Fifth Amendment, Seeking to Avoid Potential Charges; New York Times, March 30, 2017

Daisuke Wakabayashi and Mike Isaac, New York Times; 

Uber Executive Invokes Fifth Amendment, Seeking to Avoid Potential Charges


"“The more we get into this, it might look like a public relations disaster for Uber,” said Michael Carrier, a law professor at Rutgers University. “The mere fact that you’re pleading the Fifth doesn’t look good.”"

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

BrewDog backs down over Lone Wolf pub trademark dispute; Guardian, March 27, 2017

Rob Davies, Guardian; 

BrewDog backs down over Lone Wolf pub trademark dispute

"Branding expert Graham Hales, chief marketing officer at the Chemistry Group, said BrewDog had made the right decision by backing down. “Lawyers have their jobs to do and any brand needs to protect its trademark,” he said. “That being said, the sense of David versus Goliath in a business context is something people will comment on."

Saturday, June 20, 2009

Bankruptcy could protect Jammie Thomas; CNet News, 6/19/09

Greg Sandoval via CNet News; Bankruptcy could protect Jammie Thomas:

"[I]n the past, when someone was found liable of willful copyright infringement, the law prevented the defendant from discharging, or wiping out the debt in bankruptcy court. Last year, however, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found in the case of Barboza vs. New Form, that "willful" meant one thing in civil court and something else in bankruptcy court.

In trademark or copyright cases, "willful" means that a defendant knew what they were doing. According to the Ninth Circuit, bankruptcy laws mandate that for a debt to be non-dischargeable, a plaintiff must prove a defendant was "willful and malicious," meaning the person's intent was to cause harm.

Even entertainment lawyers agree that the Ninth Circuit's decision in Barboza makes it tougher for copyright owners to collect damages. Kathryn Bartow, an attorney with Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, a Los Angeles-based law firm that does extensive work for the major movie studios, wrote in a February issue of her firm's newsletter:

(Barboza) serves as a warning to trademark and copyright owners as well as the counsel who represent them in willful infringement cases. When presenting evidence and crafting jury instructions, beware. In willful infringement cases, to prevent an individual defendant from having its debt discharged in bankruptcy, the plaintiff should consider introducing sufficient evidence and including additional jury instructions to satisfy the Bankruptcy Code's definitions of 'willful and malicious.'

If the jury had only found Thomas-Rasset guilty of copyright infringement instead of willful infringement, it would have been easier for her to get rid of the debt...

For the RIAA, the size of the damages stamps it with the bully label and backfires when it comes to public relations. That's the opinion of Ben Sheffner, a former entertainment lawyer and copyright proponent. He says the jury award also potentially hurts the RIAA if someone decides to challenge the damages on constitutional grounds.

"On the plus side, the decision sent a strong message," Sheffner said. Twenty-four "average Minnesotans with no ties to the entertainment industry have now said what she did was wrong and she deserves a strong punishment. On the other side, the size of the monetary damages could be used as serious ammo against the music industry.""

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10269251-93.html

Big music file-sharing penalties getting tuned out; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 6/20/09

Michael Fuoco via Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; Big music file-sharing penalties getting tuned out:

"Moreover, it may soon be legal for P2P file-sharing. Major record labels are discussing the possibility of a new entity called Choruss in which blanket licenses would be granted to universities and someday residential ISPs for a fee that would authorize the music swapping.

As for now, the Recording Industry Association of America, the trade group that represents the U.S. recording industry, is dealing with commercial, residential and university ISPs, informing them when one of their users is illegally file sharing, said RIAA spokeswoman Cara Duckworth. The ISPs then inform the violators and take escalating action, which usually first involves cease-and-desist letters and can escalate to loss of service...

According to market research company NPD Group, legal downloading of digital music has now surpassed illegal file-sharing. Legal downloading has risen from 16 to 22 percent of Internet users while P2P downloading has decreased from 19 to 18 percent during that same period.

Fred von Lohmann, senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit group for consumer digital consumer rights, said RIAA may have lost more than it won in the trial when it comes to public relations.

"If you read between the lines, the recording industry is a little chagrined. They're not celebrating, saying this is what she deserved," he said. "They're sensitive this is an outrageous amount. Even people who are otherwise on their side wouldn't disagree. In some ways, this assists critics of the recording industry."

That's why something like Choruss is a much better approach than punishment in dealing reasonably with file sharing on the Internet, he said. Under the plan being discussed, universities would pay into a fund that would allow their students to "file share to their hearts content," Mr. von Lohmann said. "It's a future-looking piece. It takes policing out of this."

He said that in talking to college students, they all said they wouldn't mind paying $5 more a month in student activities fees for such a service.

"It's not that people won't pay but you can't create a system in which it is harder for them to pay than to do a free thing. At $5 a month, it will feel free to them."

Ms. Duckworth said Choruss is "an innovative way to deal with college online piracy, an interesting concept that is being shopped to different schools. All the major record labels are on board in discussing this, trying to figure out what works best."

She said the RIAA is realistic it will never completely stop illegal online sharing "because we know it's going to happen. We know there are going to be individuals who think music and content should be free.

"What we want to do is to deter casual file sharers, people who wouldn't do this all the time, and direct them to go in the right direction."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09171/978771-84.stm

Sunday, May 24, 2009

UMich Gets Better Deal in Google’s Library of the Future Project; Wired.com, 5/21/09

Ryan Singel via Wired.com; UMich Gets Better Deal in Google’s Library of the Future Project:

"The new Google-UM agreement (.pdf) gives the university a digital copy of every book on its shelves, regardless of whether Google scanned its copy or another library’s. The school gets more rights to distribute its copies of the digitized works, and, most importantly for Google public relations, a way for the school to protest the pricing scheme of full-text institutional subscriptions to the millions of digitized books.

University of Michigan is one of the largest of the 29 libraries who have been digitizing public-domain and in-copyright books in conjunction with Google Book Search."

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/05/umich-gets-better-deal-in-googles-library-of-the-future-project/