You haven't waived your copyrights.... You're still entitled to the protections offered by copyright law, except, if you didn't register within 3 months of your first publication of the photos, you can't get Statutory Damages, and you'll be responsible for your own attorneys' fees. But, you CAN get an award of your actual damages (which might be measured in a few different ways), and you CAN get an injunction (restraining order) against further infringement of your work. File your...
Selected as best answer
Bad idea. It's copyright infringement, plain and simple. You might "get away with it", or, you might get caught. The risk is that at the very least, if caught, your production gets shut down, and you lose your investment of resources. At worst, you could find yourself on the receiving end of a lawsuit for "willfull infringement", to the tune of $150,000 per infringing act, or more. The cost of licensing is quite small, relative to this risk. Just pay for the rights. The folks who...
10 lawyers agreed with this answer
It's not just copyright that you need to think about. For example, certain structures may also have trademark protection, and can't be used in or as a commercial product. Selling Art prints might be different than selling postcards or coffee-table books. For example, the Hollywood Sign is such a structure, as is the Disney Hall in downtown LA. Consult an attorney to evaluate your specific situation in greater detail. The answer isn't black-and-white, I'm afraid.
8 lawyers agreed with this answer
This DOES sound like a right of publicity claim. Trademark claims would have to be asserted by the designer, IF he/she owns a trademark, or can substantiate other unfair competition claims. Copyright infringement MAY be an issue, but the photographer probably owns the copyright in question. Are you sure you didn't sign a release when you hired the photographer? If you didn't, then right of Publicity is a viable possible claim. Consult a lawyer to investigate further.
8 lawyers agreed with this answer
1 person marked this answer as helpful
Whether it is or is not a fair use, it will be less costly to license the song than to litigate the issue of fair use. This is a DEFENSE, which means you argue the point AFTER you get sued. You could easily win the battle, but lose the war.
8 lawyers agreed with this answer
1 person marked this answer as helpful
On the facts as you've outlined them, it seems likely you could prevail in opposing the junior user's application, or having their registration cancelled... But, you might succeed with as little as a simple bit of lawyerly correspondence explaining your priority of use, and illustrating that you have the superior rights to the mark. The other winery might see the virtue of bowing out gracefully. Regardless, you'll almost certainly need a lawyer to help you formulate your strategy in...
8 lawyers agreed with this answer
It really depends on the nature and scope of the "stakeholder" relationship. Work created by an employee within the course ands scope of the employment relationship probably belongs to the employer (absent a specific agreement to the contrary). A Director who is not also an employee presents a different situation, but it is still possible that the nonprofit has a valid claim to the results and proceeds of the Director's creation, if the Director, in creating the work did so either as a...
6 lawyers agreed with this answer
Your "Friend" isn't your friend. She's screwing you over. Tell her she needs to make the situation right, or you'll have your lawyer get involved. You'll be suing her and the production company if they proceed without properly crediting and compensating you. Go out and find a good lawyer to help you with this. You're going to need it.
7 lawyers agreed with this answer
1 person marked this answer as helpful
Yes. As a theatrical attorney, I see this kind of thing all the time. Playwrights, directors, & producers often overlook the need to secure the so-called "underlying" rights in the material on which they base their works. It'd be tragic to spend all that time and energy writing your show, only to have the Seuss folks shut you down... You'll want to consult someone who can help you make a smart deal wit the rights holders, so they share some of the financial downside in the early...
7 lawyers agreed with this answer
I'm not an immigration expert. I practice entertainment law. That said, I think that the answers to your questions are: 1. Yes, because the work is property, and could be sold to you from outside or inside the U.S. 2. Yes, insofar as it deals with the sale of the material. No, if the contract calls for him to render services in the U.S. 3. Probably not. It is illegal to employ someone to work within the U.S. without proper immigration status, Providing writer services...
Selected as best answer