In the latest development regarding suits by young women who come to regret being filmed in compromising states of undress during Spring Break, Mardi Gras, etc., a Denton County, Tex. jury has decided to award no damages to Brittany Lowry and Lezlie Fuller, who “accused Mantra Films of misappropriation and fraud after the two were videotaped in March 2002 flashing their breasts during a vacation at Panama City Beach, Fla.” (Domingo Ramirez Jr., “Women lose Girls Gone Wild lawsuit”, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Jun. 29)(via Lattman). Earlier: Sept. 28-30, 2001; Mar. 6-7, 2002; May 1, 2006; May 2, 2006.
Posts Tagged ‘movies film and videos’
Whatever happened to the Nitpicker’s Guides?
Ask Paramount, whose lawyers zealously police unauthorized discussion of the Star Trek franchise (NitCentral, May 15, 1998, scroll to Phil Farrand, “I’m afraid I have some bad news”; Aug. 7, 1998, scroll to “Bullies on the Playground”). More on fan literature: Feb. 14, 2005.
“Hollywood’s Most Litigious Assistants”
Gawker Media LA-blog Defamer has an entertaining cease-and-desist letter sent to a site that ranked photos of assistants on a hotness scale.
Lied about her age to get into wet T-shirt contest
Not only that, but she assumed the whirring video cameras were just for onlookers’ personal use. Certainly she wasn’t expecting the spring break footage to turn up in commercially available compilations. So Monica Pippin is now extracting legal settlements from entities including Playboy and Anheuser-Busch; however, the Daytona Beach hotel at which the contest took place objects to being sued on the grounds that it “had no role in producing or distributing the videos and did not profit from them”. (Kevin Graham, “Lawsuit says video exploits teen’s naivete”, St. Petersburg Times, Apr. 28). Similar: Sept. 28-30, 2001; Mar. 6-7, 2002.
“Hollywood Blackmail” on VH1, tonight
VH1, the cable entertainment channel known for its music videos, is running a feature news special on the problem of shakedowns and borderline-to-real extortion aimed at Hollywood celebrities. The channel interviewed me on camera to talk about some of the ways law can be used both as a remedy for shakedowns and as, itself, a weapon in the hands of the would-be shakedown practitioner. Producer Robin Edgerton tells me that several bits of the interview wound up making it into the finished program. It’s scheduled to air this evening under the title “VH1 News Presents — Hollywood Blackmail“.
Netflix claims a patent on renting movies on-line
And sues Blockbuster for allegedly infringing the patent, issued Tuesday, which purports to teach “a method for subscription-based online rental that allows subscribers to keep the DVDs they rent for as long as they wish without incurring any late fees, to obtain new DVDs without incurring additional charges and to prioritize and reprioritize their own personal dynamic queue of DVDs to be rented.” Blockbuster Online has 1 million subscribers to Netflix’s 4.2 million. (Reuters, Apr. 4). I’m suddenly a lot less sympathetic about Netflix’s class-action troubles. (Full disclosure: I own stock in Blockbuster.)
“I’m thinking about abandoning the film project”
It’s not easy to make an independent film — and one thing that makes it especially hard is the need to line up insurance against getting sued (Eric Anderson, Feb. 6)(via Insurance Coverage Law Blog).
“Borat” welcomes Kazakh suit
“The Hidden Cost of Documentaries”
Why can’t you get a DVD of “Eyes on the Prize,” which Henry Louis Gates Jr., chairman of the department of African and African-American studies at Harvard, called “the most sophisticated and most poignant documentary of African-American history ever made”? Because there are 272 still photographs, scenes from eighty archives, and music—and if a single set of rights expire, fear of copyright litigation prevents the entire movie from being shown or distributed. “Today, anyone armed with a video camera and movie-editing software can make a documentary. But can everyone afford to make it legally?” (Nancy Ramsey, New York Times, Oct. 16). American University professors Pat Aufderheide and Peter Jaszi issue an extensive report describing the problem, but draw back from the obvious solution of liability reform, and thus make their recommendations toothless. “Educating gatekeepers about creators’ use rights” will have absolutely no effect so long as it will cost a documentary filmmaker less to pay for rights than to successfully defend a lawsuit against a rights-holder.
Comedian David Cross is learning this: he’s been sued by a nightclub owner who claims that Cross didn’t have permission to record him. Sub Pop Records, which distributed the Cross CD, claims that the permissions were granted.
See also Oct. 10 and links therein.
How copyright clearance problems stultify documentaries
Forty-five percent of the budget for the movie “Mad Hot Ballroom” covered the cost of “clearing” rights to songs. The filmmaker even had to negotiate with the subject of the film not to play certain music, because the presence of an uncleared song playing in the background on a boombox would prevent a scene from being used. A three-word-shout that corresponded to the lyrics of a song would have cost the filmmakers $5,000 alone; they had to cut the scene rather than risk litigation. Carrie McLaren interviews producer/writer Amy Sewell on the Stay Free Daily blog (Jun. 22), and a follow-up post notes how the fear of litigation prevented her from asserting her fair-use rights (Jun. 22), a problem that could be solved by loser-pays rules. (Hat tip to C.N.) More: Feb. 8-10, 2002.