<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>LawLawLandBlog.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com</link>
	<description>Greenberg Glusker Entertainment Lawyers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:14:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Why Beyoncé and Jay-Z’s “Blue Ivy Carter” Trademark Application Actually Makes Sense</title>
		<link>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/whybeyonce-and-jay-zs-blue-ivy-carter-trademark-application.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/whybeyonce-and-jay-zs-blue-ivy-carter-trademark-application.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:14:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan Nabel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Talent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trademark]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/?p=1958</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Over the last few weeks, many have commented about Beyoncé and Jay-Z’s decision to apply for trademark protection for the name of their newborn child — Blue Ivy Carter.  Many have observed that the move will protect Blue Ivy and the family from exploitation, while others have accused the celebrity couple of trying to cash [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/whybeyonce-and-jay-zs-blue-ivy-carter-trademark-application.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Lesson in Trust Law, or, What Happens When a Guy Makes His Girlfriend His Daughter to Avoid Paying the Parents of the Guy He Killed</title>
		<link>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/a-lesson-in-trust-law-or-what-happens-when-a-guy-makes-his-girlfriend-his-daughter-to-avoid-paying-the-parents-of-the-guy-he-killed.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/a-lesson-in-trust-law-or-what-happens-when-a-guy-makes-his-girlfriend-his-daughter-to-avoid-paying-the-parents-of-the-guy-he-killed.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:03:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stefanie J. Lipson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trusts and Estates]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/?p=1940</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Most days, this blog is all about analyzing entertainment news stories.  Today, it’s just about analyzing an entertaining news story. Forty-eight year old Florida billionaire John Goodman (owner of the International Polo Club Palm Beach, not Roseanne’s TV husband) recently shocked courts and bloggers alike with the headline-grabbing adoption of his 42-year-old girlfriend, Heather Hutchins, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/a-lesson-in-trust-law-or-what-happens-when-a-guy-makes-his-girlfriend-his-daughter-to-avoid-paying-the-parents-of-the-guy-he-killed.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>This Is Our Super Bowl Blog Post. Now Come and Get Us, NFL!</title>
		<link>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/this-is-our-super-bowl-blog-post-now-come-and-get-us-nfl.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/this-is-our-super-bowl-blog-post-now-come-and-get-us-nfl.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 20:11:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ken Basin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fair Use]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trademark]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/?p=1930</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Unless you live here, I’m assuming you’re aware of a little football game taking place this weekend between the New York Giants and the New England Patriots.  (Hey, wait a minute, that sounds awfully familiar&#8230;) I’m as excited as anyone for the game, which is why, this Sunday, I might try to find a local bar [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/this-is-our-super-bowl-blog-post-now-come-and-get-us-nfl.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Q&amp;A:  How Does Final Cut Work, and Should I Get It?</title>
		<link>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/qa-how-does-final-cut-work-and-should-i-get-it.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/qa-how-does-final-cut-work-and-should-i-get-it.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:18:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt Galsor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Contracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Film and Television]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Q&A]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Talent]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/?p=1923</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Q:  I will be directing a small feature financed by private investors.  It’s based on my script.  I want to ask for final cut, but I know only big time directors get final cut.  Anyway, I wonder if it’s something I can ask for and how final cut works. A:  In many ways, a director [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/02/qa-how-does-final-cut-work-and-should-i-get-it.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>“No SOPA For You!”  Why SOPA Led to Such an Acrimonious Fight and What We Can Learn From It</title>
		<link>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/no-sopa-for-you.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/no-sopa-for-you.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 07:28:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jesse Saivar</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DMCA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/?p=1909</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you read the paper, watch TV, listen to the radio or use the Internet, it’s been tough to avoid SOPA recently.  (If you don’t, well, you’re probably hand-writing angry missives in a cabin and not reading this.)  What we’ve seen thus far are two widely-popular, well-funded industries passionately going toe-to-toe with one another, with [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/no-sopa-for-you.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Major Brew-haha on Tap</title>
		<link>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/a-major-brew-haha-on-tap.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/a-major-brew-haha-on-tap.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 21:22:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Elisabeth Moriarty</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Food and Drink]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trademark]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/?p=1894</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In honor of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., last Monday my husband and I found ourselves with three glorious hours to kill midday, while our daughter visited a friend.  We could have cleaned out the garage, but instead we went to lunch at a new-ish bar and grill which prides itself on serving over 100 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/a-major-brew-haha-on-tap.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Q&amp;A:  Am I in Trouble if I&#8217;m Optioning a Book That Includes a Character That Has Already Been Optioned?</title>
		<link>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/qa-am-i-in-trouble-if-im-optioning-a-book.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/qa-am-i-in-trouble-if-im-optioning-a-book.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 18:32:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jesse Saivar</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Contracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Film and Television]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Q&A]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/?p=1885</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Q:  I’ve been negotiating an option on a book for a few weeks and we’re about to the point where we’re going to sign the paperwork.  The book is a pretty standard detective novel.  The other day the author happened to mention that he had already sold one of his books to a studio.  It [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/qa-am-i-in-trouble-if-im-optioning-a-book.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Becoming Immune to Reputation Damage:  Tips from Kim Kardashian?</title>
		<link>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/becoming-immune-to-reputation-damage-tips-from-kim-kardashian.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/becoming-immune-to-reputation-damage-tips-from-kim-kardashian.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 00:00:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rachel Wilkes Barchie</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Defamation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right of Publicity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Talent]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/?p=1879</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This blogger is proud to say that I have never watched any show featuring a member of the Kardashian family (okay, okay, unless you count their step-brother Brody Jenner…you know I could never resist The Hills).  I normally try to pretend to steer clear of anything Kardashian, as I fall into the camp of people [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/becoming-immune-to-reputation-damage-tips-from-kim-kardashian.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Consequences for Painting Lipstick on a Pig With Borrowed Lipstick</title>
		<link>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/consequences-for-painting-lipstick-on-a-pig-with-borrowed-lipstick.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/consequences-for-painting-lipstick-on-a-pig-with-borrowed-lipstick.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 17:54:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan Nabel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fair Use]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/?p=1846</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The famous Czech writer Milan Kundera once wrote that “business has only two functions — marketing and innovation.”  But some industries — like the alcohol industry — have pretty much hit the limit on innovation (unless you consider things like a tequila bottle top which doubles as a shot glass “innovative”).  This means that the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/consequences-for-painting-lipstick-on-a-pig-with-borrowed-lipstick.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Creepy Tweeters Have Speech Rights Too</title>
		<link>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/creepy-tweeters-have-speech-rights-too.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/creepy-tweeters-have-speech-rights-too.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:59:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rachel Wilkes Barchie</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Defamation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/?p=1837</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If our dear readers look at my past blog posts, you might think I’m vying for a Bloggie Award* for “Most Posts Related to Social Media.”  As someone who personally spends a fair amount of time keeping up with my friends/news outlets/favorite restaurants through social media, many of the legal disputes that catch my eye [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawlawlandblog.com/2012/01/creepy-tweeters-have-speech-rights-too.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Object Caching 871/1039 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.lawlawlandblog.com @ 2012-02-22 19:04:04 -->
