CALL US! (310) 421-9970

Entertainment Law Update Podcast, Epsiode 5 – of Hobbits, Lamps, Photographers & Google Books

Episode 5 of my Entertainment Law Update podcast is now available.   Please visit the site to subscribe using iTunes or your favorite RSS Reader.  Attorneys can get California MCLE (Continuing Legal Eduction) credit, too!

podcast-logo [audio:]
Download Episode (right click)
Approximate Running Time: 1:03

In this Episode:

  • Annie Liebovitz mortgages her copyrights, gets sued.
  • Ellen Degeneres doesn't roll with licensing music for her show.
  • Tolkiens settle, Hobbit movie going forward.
  • Disney forgets trademark law basics?
  • The Google Books Settlement.
  • and more!

2 Responses to Entertainment Law Update Podcast, Epsiode 5 – of Hobbits, Lamps, Photographers & Google Books

  1. Hello Gordon,

    Thanks for the great Podcast. Very informative.

    I listened with interest about the Burning Man “on ticket” license issue. I have a couple of friends that attend, and there’s a wrinkle that may be driving the license issue.

    In addition to the general frivolity by the attendees of the Festival, many people spend months preparing multimedia sculptures and other mixed art/performance art pieces that are displayed during the event; things such as welded steel sculptures with live fire effects, or sculptures with imbedded TV’s displaying video content, etc.

    I know some of the artists/performers/attendees-with-displays have taken issue with their work being “taken” via photographs and video by other attendees, and subsequently displayed on YouTube, etc., without any authorization by the artists/performers – some of whom are apparently working artists, sculptors and creative types in their day jobs.

    And apparently some of the artists have tried to get the Burning Man organization to implement and/or enforce limitations on such use, or discussed holding Burning Man liable for the unauthorized use of the images.

    But, as you know, if the photos and images were taken in public view, it may be – or may have been – that Burning Man had no right to implement and/or enforce limitations.

    It may be that the area in the desert where the festival is held is public property – a national park area; and that there are no fences cordoning off the area – apparently it’s so far in the desert, that generally no members of the public accidentally stumble onto the site.

    So it may be that Burning Man’s new assertion of rights is an effort to address the artist-attendees concerns of unauthorized photographing and recording, and subsequent display, of their sculpture and performance art pieces.

    Thanks again, and I look forward to future Podcasts.


Find us on Google+