Entertainment Law Update is a free
podcast, host by Gordon P. Firemark. The
podcast discusses current legal issues going on in the entertainment
industry. The discussions are very
informative and genuinely fun to listen to.
Entertainment Law Update has about 41 episodes that can be
reviewed. Each episode is about an hour
long. Many of the episodes discussed infringement. Copyright infringement is a major issue that
my company will need to protect itself against.
The
first podcast I reviewed was episode 41, “Aero, ReDigi, Veihoh & IMDB”. This episode discussed the Viacom v. YouTube
case. Viacom sued YouTube for copyright
infringement in 2007. This has been an
ongoing suit that has yet to reach a final settlement. Infringement such as
this could affect my business if precautions are not made. Throughout the year, my company will present
multiple musicals and plays. Although we
will have purchased the rights to the show we are presenting, it is illegal to
record or post any of these performance.
If an audience member records our productions and posts them to a
website such as YouTube, this content will be considered unauthorized and
illegal.
I
also reviewed episode 38, “When a Foot is only 11 Inches, and a Batmobile is a
character”. One of the topics reviewed
in this episode was the Spiderman musical Lawsuit. Julie Taymor, one of the original writers of
the musical, sued the producers of the show after she had been fired, claiming
her authorship. Julie claims that her work has been infringed upon. A case like this is also associated with my
business. Original musicals will be
written and produced within our school.
Any musicals or plays produced will be property of the company and
cannot be used for outside reasons.
The last podcast I
reviewed was Episode 39, “Holmes, Zorro and the Tin Man”. This episode also discussed copyright
infringement associated with theater.
The archival owners of the Ed Sullivan show sued the hit musical “Jersey
Boys” for using a 7-second clip from the show.
The court ruled that the 7-second clip was considered “fair use”. It was discussed that this clip was used as a
biographical and historical reference to the Four Season’s story. Because the clip was portraying factual
information, this clip was not considered infringement. The clip also had no quantitative
significance. I am actually shocked at
the court’s decision. When I originally
heard about this case, I assumed that this would be considered to be infringement. This case shows that if executed properly,
you can legally use highly effective clips or work for your original
piece.
Entertainment
Law Update provides listeners with relevant issues within the entertainment industry, especially infringement. I like
that there are multiple examples and levels of infringement cases
discussed. I enjoyed reviewing the
podcast episodes, and went on to subscribe to them as well.
