Copyright Lately

New development in Donald Trump's longest running legal battle—a #copyright infringement lawsuit filed by musician Eddy Grant, who sued Trump nearly four years ago over the unauthorized use of his 1983 hit “Electric Avenue” in a 2020 campaign video. The video was created by a third party and was then posted by the former president on his personal Twitter account. Motions for summary judgment were filed in the case last year, and SDNY District Judge John Koetl today set oral argument for August 5. Stay tuned!

In case you missed it. (I get it, lots of couch memes to get through.)

A new case questions a long-held understanding of copyright termination’s impact outside the United States. Did the court overstep its boundaries? Check out the full story and my take, up now on Copyright Lately! https://lnkd.in/gBFVP_6V #copyright #copyrightlately #copyrightlaw #IPlaw #internationallaw

Big and welcome news, especially for us 1909 Act nerds. 👏 U.S. Copyright Office!

NEW: By now, you’ve probably heard about the copyright infringement and false endorsement lawsuit filed by legendary hip-hop group Beastie Boys against Chili’s Grill & Bar. But did the Beastie Boys sue the wrong restaurant for copyright infringement? I tracked down the video at the center of the Chili’s “Sabotage” controversy and have the surprising scoop—up now, only on Copyright Lately! #copyright #copyrightlately #copyrightlaw #entertainmentlaw #iplaw

Another copyright termination lawsuit bites the dust, as Columbia Pictures has dismissed its case against the writers of the story on which the Bad Boys film franchise was based, following a settlement between the parties. The agreement ends a lawsuit filed a year ago in which Columbia claimed that writer George Gallo’s use of a loan-out company prevented him from terminating his 1985 copyright assignment to the studio. https://lnkd.in/grxanE8U

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times: you can’t copyright the idea of an animated talking manatee. #copyright #copyrightlaw #copyrightlately #iplaw

Quick update on that massive reggaetón infringement lawsuit I wrote about last year. The case was brought by representatives of famed Jamaican dancehall producers Steely & Clevie against Bad Bunny, Luis Fonsi, Daddy Yankee, Karol G, Maluma, Pitbull, and more than 140 other popular reggaetón artists, songwriters, and record companies. After taking defendants' motions to dismiss under submission for the past seven months, Judge André Birotte, Jr. largely denied their bid for an early dismissal yesterday, finding that it would be premature to rule on originality or protectability on the pleadings: "The court is unprepared at this stage to examine the history of the reggaeton and dancehall genres and dissect the genres’ features to determine whether the elements common between the allegedly infringing works and the subject works are commonplace, and thus unprotectable, as a matter of law," Birotte wrote. While the court's ruling largely sidestepped the marquee issue in the case—the protectability of the musical elements comprising the Dem Bow composition, either individually or in combination—it's still early. The lawsuits resulting in the Ninth Circuit's recent opinions in the Led Zeppelin "Stairway to Heaven" case (Skidmore v. Zeppelin) and the Katy Perry "Dark Horse" case (Gray v. Hudson) both went to a jury following lengthy discovery and expert testimony. This one may take a while too, and the stakes are incredibly high. Check out Judge Birotte's order here: https://lnkd.in/gVfAW_Gi And my post discussing the lawsuit and its implications here: https://lnkd.in/gs5MRnia https://lnkd.in/gRC6WuXn

What happens when copyright termination and a divorce settlement collide? Judge Kronstadt’s summary judgment ruling in the long-running lawsuit between Cher and Mary Bono was 15 pages long, but it can be summed up in four words: “I Got You Paid.” Check out the full story and a copy of the court’s order, up now on Copyright Lately: https://lnkd.in/gBJV9svA #copyright #copyrightlaw #copyrightlately #familylaw #IPlaw #copyrighttermination #entertainmentlaw

In 2013, 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘕𝘦𝘸 𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 gave Spike Jonze’s film 𝘏𝘦𝘳 a dubious honor, calling it the scariest movie of the year. The titular “Her” is Samantha, an AI personal assistant, and the movie paints a disguised dystopia in which humans are all too easily subjugated to the seductive voice of technology. The “voice” in 𝘏𝘦𝘳 belongs to actress Scarlett Johansson, and the film just so happens to be OpenAI cofounder and CEO Sam Altman’s favorite movie about artificial intelligence. Fast forward to 2024, when Altman introduces GPT 4o, an AI personal assistant with a voice that Johansson claims sounds “eerily similar” to her own. Johansson revealed on Monday that for the past nine months she’s been courted by Altman, who wanted to hire her to voice OpenAI’s new chatbot. She declined, but numerous observers have commented on the similarities, and Altman himself did little to dispel the connection, posting the word “Her” on X soon after the company announced its new product. Does Johansson have a legal claim against OpenAI? Today I joined Matthew Belloni, author of Puck's “What I’m Hearing” newsletter on his acclaimed podcast "The Town" to discuss Scarlett Johansson, OpenAI and some of the thorny legal issues surrounding rights of publicity and copyright in the age of artificial intelligence. Check out the interview at the link below or wherever you’re listening to pods these days. https://lnkd.in/gGHZ3m8Y #iplaw, #copyrightlaw, #copyrightlately, The Ringer, Spotify