• Welcome

    Gordon Firemark headshot
    The Law Offices of Gordon P. Firemark are entertainment attorneys dedicated to the legal and business affairs needs of clients in the entertainment and media industries. By offering those kinds of legal and business affairs services handled in-house at the larger studios, production companies, talent agencies and record labels, we help small and mid-sized entertainment businesses, individual producers, writers and artists to reliably and efficiently out-source their legal and business affairs work.
  • SUBSCRIBE

    To receieve email updates when new material is added to this page
    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner


    Subscribe in a reader

  • Recommended Reading


  • Del.icio.us

  • RSS TheatreMania

  • Archives

  • Meta

  • « On Negotiating - Recommended Reading | Main | “All the World’s a Stage” - Basics of Theatre Law for Hollywood lawyers. »

    More on Smoking Bans and the Theatre

    By Gordon Firemark | April 17, 2007

    A good piece by Tony Brown for Sunday’s Cleveland Plain Dealer raises the question of whether city and state smoke-free ordinances can- or should- be applied to theatre. The piece draws the important comparison to censorship battles surrounding language and nudity in theater in past decades.

    According to Brown’s piece, few states, localities or countries have provided for exceptions to their smoking bans. This has led producers and theatres to make changes (usually unauthorized by playwrights), cancel productions altogether, or simply to flout the law. In fact, many such bans even prohibit the use of ‘alternative’ smoke products such as the herbal bidi cigarettes often used by non-smokers performing parts that call for smoking. Government officials often take the view that crafting exceptions to a law can ultimately render the law useless.. the exceptions swallow the rule. Nevertheless, a move is afoot in Ohio to carve a theater exception to the state’s prohibition on smoking in public places.

    For the most part, legal scholars agree that theatres and producer would have the First Amendment on their side, were they to challenge a smoking ban in court. It’s hard to imagine a court enforcing such a prior restraint on an artistic expression. the question, then, will be whether smoking on stage can be considered a form of artistic expression.

    In my view, neither government nor Courts should be involved in a determination of what constitutes Art. Art, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

    Note… interestingly, Ohio has been home to more than a few first amdendment battles. Notably, the unsuccessful 1990 prosecution of the Cincinnati Contemporary Arts Center and its director Dennis Barrie on charges of “pandering obscenity” for displaying Robert Mapplethorpe’s The Perfect Moment exhibit .

    Topics: Art, Entertainment law, Law, Theatre law
    Print this Post

    Comments