Alleged unauthorized use of composition and sound recording as "theme" for professional wrestler (WWE), John Cena.
The Royalty Network Inc. v. Sony BMG, World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. et al, No. 08 cv 8828 (S.D.N.Y. complaint filed 10/15/08)
October 21, 2008
Gershwin Royalty Dispute
Dispute between the plaintiff, successor to the interests of Ira Gershwin, and the successors to the interests of George Gershwin over the appropriate allocation of royalties in connection with the licensing of a ballet celebrating the Gershwins, staged in June 2008 at the Royal Albert Hall in London by the English National Ballet entitled "Strictly Gershwin." Complaint seeks declaratory judgment.
The Leonore Gershwin 1987 Trust v.The Arthur Gershwin Testamentary Trust et al, No. 08-114000 (Sup.Ct., NY Co. filed October 17, 2008).
The Leonore Gershwin 1987 Trust v.The Arthur Gershwin Testamentary Trust et al, No. 08-114000 (Sup.Ct., NY Co. filed October 17, 2008).
October 20, 2008
U2 Gets Shares In Livenation
New York Times reports:
U2 will receive almost $19 million in shares of the concert promotor Live Nation as part of a 12-year contract with the company it signed in March.
U2 will receive almost $19 million in shares of the concert promotor Live Nation as part of a 12-year contract with the company it signed in March.
October 17, 2008
Antitrust Claims Against Majors Dismissed
In re Digital Music Antitrust Litigation, No. 06 MDL 1780, 10/17/08 N.Y.L.J. "Decision of Interest" (S.D.N.Y. decided Oct. 9, 2008) (Preska, J.)
Plaintiffs sought to represent a nation-wide class of buyers of "digital music" on claims that defendant recording companies conspired to artificially fix prices on digital music (both CDs and Internet music). Defendants, the major record labels (EMI, SonyBMG, UMG, anmd Warner) allegedly fixed a high price for, and restrained availability of Internet music - by imposing the same price and use restrictions (i.e., DRM) on their sale thereof - which "buoyed" the price of CDs.
Plaintiffs' second consolidated amended complaint dismissed under the pleading standards of Bell Atlantic v. Twombly. Plaintiffs' first claim was for violation of section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The court concluded it was unreasonable to infer that defendants' adoption of DRM and parallel price arose from their membership in joint ventures that were created to distribute Internet Music. Other circumstantial evidence also did not justify an inference that defendants' parallel conduct resulted from an illegal agreement under the Sherman Act. For example, the court found there was no "antitrust record" based on investigation by government agencies, including the NY Attorney General. Nor would"mere participation in an industry trade association" yield an inference of improper inter-firm communication.
Similarly dismissed as predicated on the same allegations were state antitrust claims, consumer protection claims, and the unjust enrichment count.
Plaintiffs sought to represent a nation-wide class of buyers of "digital music" on claims that defendant recording companies conspired to artificially fix prices on digital music (both CDs and Internet music). Defendants, the major record labels (EMI, SonyBMG, UMG, anmd Warner) allegedly fixed a high price for, and restrained availability of Internet music - by imposing the same price and use restrictions (i.e., DRM) on their sale thereof - which "buoyed" the price of CDs.
Plaintiffs' second consolidated amended complaint dismissed under the pleading standards of Bell Atlantic v. Twombly. Plaintiffs' first claim was for violation of section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The court concluded it was unreasonable to infer that defendants' adoption of DRM and parallel price arose from their membership in joint ventures that were created to distribute Internet Music. Other circumstantial evidence also did not justify an inference that defendants' parallel conduct resulted from an illegal agreement under the Sherman Act. For example, the court found there was no "antitrust record" based on investigation by government agencies, including the NY Attorney General. Nor would"mere participation in an industry trade association" yield an inference of improper inter-firm communication.
Similarly dismissed as predicated on the same allegations were state antitrust claims, consumer protection claims, and the unjust enrichment count.
October 15, 2008
October 10, 2008
Ono/EMI Withdraw All Claims Against Premise Media
Article:
"Yoko Ono and EMI Records have withdrawn all claims filed against Premise Media. The dismissal follows failed attempts by Yoko Ono in federal court and EMI Records in state court to enjoin Premise Media’s documentary, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” because it uses a 15-second clip of a John Lennon song."
Prior Posts.
"Yoko Ono and EMI Records have withdrawn all claims filed against Premise Media. The dismissal follows failed attempts by Yoko Ono in federal court and EMI Records in state court to enjoin Premise Media’s documentary, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” because it uses a 15-second clip of a John Lennon song."
Prior Posts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
