Intellectual Property and Copyright cases are common in the Entertainment industry. This blog will review three cases and determine the opinion from a student's perspective.
The first case deals with stealing of intellectual property of a film.
Hollywood Reporter states:
“ Two years ago, shortly before The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn was released, Summit Entertainment made a fuss over an Argentinian hacking group that allegedly broke into its computer servers and obtained copyrighted material. The studio, now a subsidiary of Lionsgate, identified Daiana Santia as the perpetrator of efforts to circulate photos, unfinished images and video of Breaking Dawn.
The lawsuit was to recover damages for copyright infringement for Summit films. The servers were allegedly hacked by the named perpetrators and images were shared before the films release date. Summit pursued damages as is their right under copyright protection in the United States. Unfortunately, the courts did not agree with Summit's claims and the case was denied.” (Hollywood Reporter)
Opinion: Even if Summit took two years to bring charges against the perpetrators, there is still a case. This piracy, whether in the United States or elsewhere should be adjudicated. Letting people hack into servers first of all and letting them get away with piracy is unthinkable. This is the crux of the piracy issue. What protection do film companies have if anyone can access their work illegally and distribute it without retribution. I think the case should have been in favor of Summit Entertainment.
The second case is from Hollywood Reporter:
“Will
a new "Dungeons and Dragons" film be made by Warner Bros. or will it
be made by Universal Pictures? A legal game is afoot to settle the answer.
Courtney Solomon's Sweetpea
Entertainment believes that it can set up a movie for Warner Bros. In 1994,
Solomon's company acquired D&D film rights in a deal with Hasbro and has
since made one theatrical motion picture and two TV films. It was eyeing a
fourth D&D film for Warner Bros., but before a deal was completed, Hasbro
filed a lawsuit to stop it.
In its May lawsuit, Hasbro claimed that Sweetpea's rights had reverted.
Believing that it had regained rights, Hasbro licensed Universal Pictures to
make a "Dungeons and Dragons" reboot, and upon word of another
D&D film in development, the toy company alleged that Sweetpea had
committed copyright infringement. “ (Hollywood Reporter)
Opinion: This case signifies the
importance of knowing who has the copyright before going ahead with production
in a film company. Somehow these two entities were working as if each of them
owned the copyright. The article claims that the contract is ambiguous and not
clear. Therefore, it would be pertinent to have clear language in any contract
where copyright is assigned.
The
third and last case from Hollywood Reporter’s website:
“A
Colorado judge has put another stamp on the cursed history of Stan Lee Media.
The
company founded by Stan Lee in the mid-90s has been waging war in courts
around the country ever since it emerged from bankruptcy a decade ago without
valuable franchises like Fantastic Four, X-Men and Spider-Man.
SLM
has attempted to hold various parties responsible for that fate, including Lee,
including Marvel, and last but not least, Disney.
Last
October, SLM filed
a billion dollar lawsuit that alleged that Disney had committed copyright
infringement on Lee's famous comic characters, "based upon Disney's
independently actionable conduct which occurred after April 2009."
As
we pointed out when the lawsuit was filed, the plaintiff figured to have a
mountain ahead of them in getting beyond all the prior decisions in New York,
California and Colorado courts that had gone against them.
Even
though, SLM argued that this case was different than what came before, U.S.
District Judge William Martinez disagrees.” (Hollywood Reporter)
Opinion:
This case revolves around a copyright that was established in1998. Apparently
it was not a strong case as Stan Lee Media has not been able to win even one of
the court hearings regarding its allegations of copyright infringement. SLM has
gone before courts for 10 years seeking copyright infringement on an agreement
it had with Stan Lee back in 1998. The courts did not recognize this as a legitimate
claim to the copyright, therefore did not agree with the case.
When
doing business in film, it is imperative to have clear agreements and contracts
to make sure all creators’ rights are protected. This type of lawsuit could be
avoided by having good contracts made up before work is produced and aired.
ReferencesBreaking Legal News & Entertainment Law Blog - THR, ESQ.. (n.d.). The Latest Entertainment & Hollywood News - The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved September 12, 2013, from http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blogs/thr-esq
