Dan Nabel

Contact Dan

A while back, I blogged about “When DMCA Take-Down Notices Backfire.” Now, artist Jeff Koons has provided us with a terrific (and related) example of when overzealous cease-and-desist letters (the ink-and-paper cousins of DMCA take-down notices) make other people want to smack you.

Earlier this month, the San Francisco Bay Citizen reported that Koons’ lawyers recently sent a cease-and-desist letter to an independent San Francisco retail store/art gallery called Park Life. The offending infringement: balloon dog book-ends that are “copies” of Koons’ balloon dog sculptures.

This prompted Reyhan Harmanci of the Bay Citizen to ask two questions: “Can one copyright a balloon animal? And how does an artist who has been repeatedly sued for inappropriately using others’ copyrighted images get off attacking Park Life?” Continue reading the full story . . . »

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Rachel Wilkes Barchie

Contact Rachel

In a recent episode of CBS’ The Good Wife (which this blogger will go ahead and admit she loves, particularly for its disciplined realism — because obviously, all fresh-out-of-law-school first year associates get to try murder cases by themselves), Zachary Florrick (the teenage son of the title character) was pressured by ne’er-do-well vixen Becca into setting up a fake Facebook page in the name of a classmate. (Another reason I love this show: gives me an excuse to use the phrase “ne’er-do-well”.) Not coincidentally, this classmate was the teenage son of Zach’s dad’s opponent in the race for State’s Attorney, Glenn Childs. Zach also created a video mocking the third candidate in the State’s Attorney race, while making it look like the video came from Childs.

In the show, hapless Zach’s actions resulted in harm to his father’s campaign: what he thought was a harmless prank was taken by the Childs campaign as a declaration of war from the Florrick campaign. But thanks to a new law on the books in California, the real-life ramifications of such actions may now be even more serious — to the tune of monetary fines and prison time.

Effective January 1, 2011, California Penal Code section 528.5 makes it a crime to impersonate another person online. Specifically, “any person who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another actual person through or on an Internet Web site or by other electronic means for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense.” Violation can result in a prison sentence of up to one year and a fine of up to $1,000 — plus a civil lawsuit from the aggrieved party. Of course, because our readers are all fine, responsible, upstanding citizens, I’m confident that none of you need to fear this new law. But let’s say you, too, were a dastardly ne’er-do-well (twice in one post!) embarking on a campaign of Internet impersonation. What would you need to know? Continue reading the full story . . . »

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Jesse Saivar

Contact Jesse

Q: I’m not a WGA member. I’m writing a script for a company that’s also non-WGA. I hope that at some point the project gains some traction and gets set up at a studio or other WGA signatory company. I’ve been told that if I am classified in my agreement (with the non-WGA company) as a “professional writer,” I’ll be able to get the WGA benefits if the project eventually winds up with a signatory. Is that true?

A: One of my biggest problems with people is that they tell you things. Take my parents. They told me that Santa Claus was a real, semi-obese man living in the North Pole. They also told me that the mall Santas are really Santa’s elves that have dressed up like him so that they can gather information and bring it back to the real Santa. And I believed them. Then one night after I lost a tooth and put it under my pillow for the Tooth Fairy to pick up, I woke up to find not Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson in a tutu, but my dad crawling on my floor with a dollar bill in his hand. After initially thinking he may have just gotten lost on the way to Jumbos Clown Room, I realized that the whole darn thing was a sham; Santa, the Tooth Fairy, and probably even Cal Worthington. Continue reading the full story . . . »

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Megan Rivetti

Contact Megan

During a Hollywood breakup, inevitably the bitter dumpee will publicly air some dirty laundry about the heartless dumper. And by now, most of us are probably bored of the endless parade of allegations ofdalliances with the nanny, obsessions with child pornography, andmind-bending racist rants (I mean, those are so overdone, right?). But every once in a while, you get a really interesting, fresh take on the mid-breakup PR takedown. For example, what if the dumpee stronglyinsinuates that the dumper is secretly into cross-dressing? Can that dumper sue the loose-lipped dumpee for defamation? Well, let’s take a look at an example.

The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills is a lovely show that documents the lives of several caring, down-to-earth, and respectful women….oh wait, wrong show. The real Real Housewives of Beverly Hills documents the dramatic lives of six well-to-do women who love their ritzy lifestyles and seem to constantly get into screaming matches with each other about absolutely nothing. (Um. Or so I hear…) One of the show’s stars, Camille Grammer (a.k.a. Kelsey Grammer’s bitter soon-to-be ex-wife), has been the instigator of many of those screaming matches. Yet, evidently not content with stirring things up in only one medium, the erstwhile Mrs. Frasier Crane went for bonus headlines during an appearance last week on theHoward Stern Show.

When Howard Stern asked Camille whether Kelsey starred in the cross-dressing Broadway show La Cage aux Folles because he is gay, Camille quickly replied, “That’s for another reason.” Howard Stern and his sidekick Robin Quivers then pressed Camille about whether Kelsey was secretly into cross-dressing. In response, a laughing Camille not-so-coyly stated, “I didn’t say it. I’m not talking about that.” While Camille did not exactly say that Kelsey likes to play dress up with women’s clothes, she never denied it or indicated that she was joking around. Instead, she strongly implied that cross-dressing was one of Kelsey’s private extracurricular activities. Before going any further, but not before hinting that Kelsey has worn her panties in the past, Camille decided to change the subject for fear she would be “smacked with a lawsuit.”

Kelsey does not seem to be all that rattled by Camille’s antics. But, this being a legal blog and all, what we want to know is: can Kelsey sue his estranged wife for defamation? Continue reading the full story . . . »

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Aaron Moss

Contact Aaron

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

These words will be heard many times today as we celebrate the birthday of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. They are, of course, from King’s famous 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech. But as you celebrate his life and listen to his words, ask yourself this question: have you ever heard the whole speech? Not just the key excerpts that will be repeatedly broadcast today on the news, but the entire, seventeen-minute address as it was given to a crowd of 200,000 in front of the Lincoln Memorial?

Ever wonder why it’s not shown on TV more often?

The answer, my friends, is copyright. Because while Dr. King may have dreamed of a world without racism, even he wouldn’t dare to dream of a world without lawsuits.

Yes, in addition to being a noted clergyman and civil rights leader, Dr. King was a copyright litigant. Continue reading the full story . . . »

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Matt Galsor

Contact Matt

Q: I spent three years developing a pilot script for a television series I created. I sent a copy to a writer/director who I knew had ties to a cable network, and with whom I had worked on another television series. Three months later, I happened to read on an online industry blog about a pilot that had been sold, the plot of which is identical to the one I sent, to the cable network the writer/director had contacts with. Then a few weeks later, I met an executive of the cable network who is familiar with the project and the writer/director. She confirmed that the pilot that was picked up by the network was with the same writer/director. It just so happened that I’d also sent a copy of my pilot script to this executive a few months prior to sending it to the writer/director. Without seeing the entire script of the pilot that was picked up, should I be suspicious about this convergence of events? What are my options here?

Signed: Trying not to be too paranoid in Hollywood.

A: Dear Too Paranoid, may I call you Too Paranoid? Thanks. Trying not to be too paranoid in Hollywood is like trying not to be too wet in a pool — futile or delusional or both. Maintaining a high, healthy level of suspicion and distrust of your friends, children, mentors, colleagues, and homo sapiens in general is a wise, time tested policy in all but few (can’t think of any) circumstances, let alone in Hollywood. Should you be suspicious of this convergence of events? Should a casino be suspicious of a player hitting a slot machine jackpot twice in a row? Continue reading the full story . . . »

Be Sociable, Share!

•