Fox Sues to Stop Film & TV Script Leaks

By Eriq Gardner

THR, Esq. | Article Link

Twentieth Century Fox is taking aggressive steps to keep its movie and TV scripts off of the Internet.

The studio has filed a lawsuit alleging roughly $15 million in damages against a New York woman, Patricia McIlvaine, who is said to have put up roughly 100 scripts online without authorization.

On her personal website, McIlvaine describes herself as a "struggling screenwriter who sells flowers over the phone by day and writes scripts by night." She says she collected scripts that were already posted on the web and made a free online library of scripts in order to assist other screenwriters. She's already soliciting donations for a legal defense fund.

Why is the studio targeting her? Spoiler alert!

According to the complaint, McIlvaine's actions allegedly cause particular damage to films and TV shows that are still in development. The postings "interfere and trade off of the costly and carefully designed creative processes that produce finished works ready for public consumption. They harm the fans who do not want their enjoyment of a movie or television show to be spoiled by knowing the story ahead of actually being able to watch it."

Fox's lawsuit mentions various scripts including Aliens, Edward Scissorhands, Wall Street, and Glee. It also mentions the leak of the script for the X-Men sequel Deadpool, which isn't scheduled to be released until 2012.

Game Over: Supreme Court to Review California’s Violent Video Game Restrictions

By Joey Weiner
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal
IPLJ Article Permalink

Following the attempts of a number of state legislatures, including those of Illinois, Michigan, Louisiana and California, to restrict minors’ rights to purchase violent video games, the Supreme Court will determine whether video games are granted the same free speech protection as other forms of expression.  On November 2nd, the Court began its review of the California Assembly Bill 1179, which Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law in 2005.[1] The law imposes a $1,000 fine on anyone who sells or rents a violent video game to a minor[2] and requires that each violent video game imported to or distributed in the state must “be labeled with a solid white ‘18’ outlined in black.”[3]

In February 2009, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to grant the Video Software Dealers Association’s motion for summary judgment to permanently enjoin enforcement of the California Assembly Bill.[4] Though both courts ruled that the Bill would violate the First Amendment, the opinions of the district court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reflect varying perspectives regarding the inherent value of video games.  The district court ruled that despite the fact that video games are “mere entertainment” and are “base and malignant,” they are still protected by the First Amendment.[5] The Ninth Circuit, on the other hand, recognized that some games, though violent, may “have extensive plot lines that involve or parallel historical events, mirror common fictional plots, or place the player in a position to evaluate and make moral choices.”[6]

French Film Director: “There is no such thing as intellectual property.”

By S. Scott Miller
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal
IPLJ Article Permalink

Influential French New Wave film director, Jean Luc Godard, has donated one thousand euro to the defense of Jean Climant, who has been accused of downloading more than 13,000 mp3s via bitorrent.  Godard has been vocal in his criticisms of intellectual property law: “I am against Hadopi [the French internet-copyright law, or its attendant agency], of course. There is no such thing as intellectual property. I’m against the inheritance [of works], for example. An artist’s children could benefit from the copyright of their parents’ works, say, until they reach the age of majority… But afterward, it’s not clear to me why Ravel’s children should get any income from Bolero… “ It looks like Godard is putting his money where his mouth is.

Forbidden Art Nyet! Russian Curator and Exhibitor Convicted for Controversial Art Exhibit

By Sheppard Mullin

Art Law Gallery Blog | Article Link

In March 2007, the exhibition "Forbidden Art-2006" opened at the Sakharov Museum in Moscow, featuring twenty-three provocative works previously banned throughout Russia. Andrei Erofeev, known as Russia's most provocative curator, organized the exhibition and Yuri Samodurov, former director of the Sakharov Museum, provided the exhibit's venue. Both have been found guilty under Russia's Criminal Code for using the exhibit to incite religious and ethnic hatred.

Erofeev installed “Forbidden Art-2006” behind temporarily constructed walls with fitted peepholes, emphasizing the deliberate choice of the audience to view the forbidden works. The controversial works considered anti-religious, pornographic and offensive by the Kremlin, included an iconoclast image of Vladimir Lenin as Jesus Christ impaled on the cross and pious Christians worshipping Mickey Mouse instead of Jesus Christ.

The Movie That Made a Supreme Court Justice

By Kirk Semple

New York Times | Article Link

Justice Sonia M. Sotomayor with the interim dean at Fordham Law, Michael M. Martin, center. After a screening of “12 Angry Men,” Justice Sotomayor spoke about the law as a theme in popular culture and how the film had influenced her life.

Around the time that Justice Sonia M. Sotomayor was entering college, the man who would eventually become her husband took her to see a film by Sidney Lumet. It was “12 Angry Men,” from 1957, about a jury deliberating on the case of a young man accused of murder.

That film turned out to be a pivotal moment in the life of Justice Sotomayor, who at the time had been considering a career in law. In particular, she was inspired by a moment in the film in which one of the jurors, a naturalized American citizen, expresses reverence for the American jury system.

“It sold me that I was on the right path,” she told an audience Sunday evening at the Fordham University School of Law after a screening of the film. “This movie continued to ring the chords within me.”

The organizers of the Fordham Law Film Festival had invited Justice Sotomayor, who last year became the first Hispanic-American to serve on the Supreme Court, to pick a film for the event. She chose “12 Angry Men,” Mr. Lumet’s first feature film.

Warner Brothers Unsatisfied With “Harry Popper” Condoms

By Allison Wadness

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal

IPLJ Article Permalink

Harry Potter-themed condoms? Sounds magical! Not to Warner Brothers, the distributor of the Harry Potter films, which has filed suit against the manufacturer of “Harry Popper” condoms, Magic X.  The packaging of the disputed condoms features a picture of a cartoon condom adorned with a wand and Harry Potter-style glasses. Harry Popper launched in 2006 and was registered as a trademark with Swissreg, the Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property in 2005.  Warner Brothers has filed an action for copyright infringement against Magic X in Switzerland and seeks cancellation of the “Harry Popper” trademark registration. The Cantonal Court in Schwyz is expected to make a ruling in a few weeks.

Magic X contends that the “Harry Popper” condoms have nothing to do with the character, but Warner Brothers cries Hufflepuff.  “This is clearly a reference to the film and fictional character Harry Potter. Everyone who sees the condoms automatically thinks of Harry Potter,” one Warner Brothers lawyer told the press.

Warner Brothers has successfully protected the Harry Potter brand in the past in such countries as Germany and Austria. However, maybe this little Popper can outlast the others.

Madonna Sued For Being The Material Girl?

By Diana Sanders

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal

IPLJ Article Permalink

When Madonna rose to international superstardom with her 1985 hit “Material Girl,” from her sophomore studio album, ‘Like a Virgin,’ the song title soon became synonymous with the artist. Decades later, she has collaborated with daughter Lourdes Leon to create a juniors fashion line cleverly named “Material Girl.” The clothing line, released exclusively to Macy’s just last month, has stirred media attention for its risqué advertising campaign and, more recently, for a legal battle over its famous name.

LA Triumph, a California corporation, filed suit for trademark infringement against Madonna and Material Girl Brand, LLC (“MGB”) on August 19, 2010 in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. LA Triumph is the successor in interest of OC Mercantile Corporation, a company issued a state law trademark by the State of California for the name “Material Girl” in 1997. The complaint states that the companies have since been selling clothing under this mark nationwide through retailers such as Nordstrom and Ross. MGB filed a federal “intent to use” trademark application on December 4, 2009 with the United States Patent & Trademark Office (“USPTO”) for the use of the Material Girl mark, and the application is currently pending.  A quick online search reveals that neither OC Mercantile nor LA Triumph have registered their marks with the USPTO.