Entertainment Litigation Blog

GOVERNOR SCHWARZENAGGER NOMINATES JUSTICE TANI CANTIL-SAKAUYE TO BECOME FIRST FILIPINO-AMERICAN ON STATE SUPREME COURT

July 22, 2010 is an historic day for the Filipino-American legal community. Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye of the California Court of Appeal has been tapped to become California's first Filipino-American Supreme Court justice and the first Asian American woman to head any state supreme court. As the President and Chief Executive Officer of the PABA Foundation -- the fundraising arm of the Philippine American Bar Association -- it's a proud day for me and the entire Filipino-American legal community.

View the Governor's press conference here.You can read PABA's press release celebrating Governor Schwarzenagger's historic announcement here. You can also read the press release of the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) about Justice Cantil-Sakauye's nomination here.

Congratulations Justice Cantil-Sakauye.

Check out my firm's new website, The Avanzado Law Firm. It replaces the temporary site I put up when I opened the firm in July. In the upcoming weeks, I'll be tweaking it and refining the content. Check back often.

WORLD CHAMPION BOXER AND THE PRIDE OF THE PHILIPPINES TO BE HONORED

The Philippine American Bar Association of Los Angeles (PABA) and the PABA Foundation have confirmed that Manny "PacMan" Pacquiao will be attending the organizations' annual installation dinner and personally accept the PABA Foundation's 2009 Kababayan Award. The Kababayan Award honors those Filipinos who inspire others through their accomplishments and service to the Filipino community. Manny's success in the ring, as well as his lesser known philanthropic efforts, have inspired millions of Filipinos and others worldwide.

Also receiving awards from PABA will be California State Bar President Holly Fujie (Distinguished Advocate for Diversity Award), Assemblyman Warren Furutani (Distinguished Community Service Award) and Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley (Distinguished Leadership Award).

Pacquiao, Fujie, Furutani, and Cooley will receive their awards at the 2009 PABA Installation and PABA Foundation Awards Dinner, to be held at the Beverly Hills Hotel and Bungalows in Beverly Hills, California, on March 11, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. Channel 7 Eyewitness News (ABC) Health Specialist Denise Dador will be the emcee.

Although PABA is increasing capacity for the event, seating remains limited. The event invitation, with RSVP form, can be downloaded here. RSVP forms should be submitted immediately to incoming PABA President-Elect Angeli Aragon via e-mail (aaragon@hinshawlaw.com) or fax (310) 909-8001. Individuals responding on or after March 6, 2009 should bring checks for their admission on the night of the event, payable to “PABA Foundation.”

I am the President and CEO of the PABA Foundation and on the Board of Governors of the Philippine American Bar Association. This is a fun evening in which we pay homage to our heritage while honoring leaders of our community. We need and welcome your support. Please RSVP by downloading the formal invitation here. Hope to see you there.

A good friend from UCLA, Michael J. O'Gara, was enrobed as a Los Angeles Superior Court judge earlier this week. Judge O'Gara was elected to the bench after a distinguished career with the Los Angeles District Attorney's office. I am confident that Judge O'Gara will continue to distinguish himself on the bench. Here's a picture of some of our college friends at Judge O'Gara's robing ceremony.

Governor Schwarzenagger announced the appointment of 17 new judges to the Los Angeles Superior Court. His office's press release can be found here.

Among the Governor's appointees is my friend and colleague, Bernie C. LaFortenza. Judge LaFortenza has served with me on the Board of Governors of the Philippine American Bar Association. He is a good man with a long record of public service. I am proud to call him my friend and colleague. He will make an exceptional jurist. Congratulations Bernie!!

Writers on both coasts officially ratified the WGA's new pact with the major studios. The agreement, accepted by the WGA's ruling board over two weeks ago on February 10, provides writers with concessions on issues that fueled their strike. These concessions include provisions governing writing for "new media" and a compensation structure for content re-used in new media. The three year deal runs through 2011. The writers ratified this new deal with over 90% in favor of the new agreement.

With the writers' new deal, the focus now shifts to the Screen Actors Guild, whose contract with the studios is set to expire on June 30. Talks between the actors and the studios are set to begin shortly.

NBC filed a lawsuit on Friday, January 25, 2008 against the creator and executive producer of its three "Law & Order" series, Dick Wolf. The lawsuit reveals a dispute between Wolf and NBC over the terms of his contracts for the three highly successful programs and seeks the court's intervention to interpret -- or reform -- the agreement between the parties.

According to NBC's complaint, Wolf takes the position that the parties agreed that the 2 season guarantee means that, should NBC terminate any of the Law & Order series, he is entitled to 2 years of producing fees, essentially as a severance or "kill fee." NBC disputes that interpretation. NBC claims that the parties agreed that NBC's promise of a 2 season guarantee means that, if NBC decides not to order an additional season of episodes, NBC would be on the hook only for the remaining year on the prior 2 year order.

The parties were unable to resolve their differences during pre-lawsuit negotiations -- and rumors abound that one or more of the Law & Order series are in trouble and could be cut from NBC's lineup.

Courts are generally loathe to change the terms of written contracts. So NBC has its work cut out for it to convince the court to re-write the agreement to conform to its understanding. And NBC claims that the agreements themselves are confidential in deciding not to file the documents with its complaint. So while it's difficult to analyze the exact dispute between the parties over interpretation of unseen documents, those details will eventually become public if the parties continue to litigate the case in the courts.

The Directors Guild announced a tentative collective bargaining agreement with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP). The DGA's description of their tentative deal can be found here. The directors received concessions on issues relating to jurisdiction over new media as well as on compensation for internet downloads and other new media.

The widely anticipated agreement now increases the pressure on the writers, who are entering the third month of their work stoppage. Whether the writers think the directors' agreement is sufficient remains to be seen.

The Writers Guild of America strike is now entering its third month. Production on film and television projects have ground to a halt. Yet, as my JMBM colleague, E. Barry Haldeman, suggests in his Malibu Times op-ed piece, the end may be in sight.

The WGA has signed "interim" agreements with independent production companies and smaller studios, which could signal a break in the ranks of the studios which have held firm against the writers' demands. The Weinstein Company, the newly revamped United Artists and David Letterman's Worldwide Pants Production Company are among the companies who have reportedly signed such interim agreements with the WGA. Those companies are now free to resume production on their projects.

In addition, the Directors Guild reportedly has achieved some progress in its "pre-negotiations" with the AMPTP. Reports suggest that the directors can reach agreement with the AMPTP in a matter of a couple of weeks.As Barry writes, these recent events give some hope that the writers' strike can also be resolved in short order.

However, the WGA and the studios/networks have recently taken adverse actions against each other, which suggests that a resolution is not imminent. The WGA has pressured networks and studios by refusing the grant waivers for the upcoming awards season. Having reduced the Golden Globes to a reading of award winners, the Oscars and the Grammys -- usually a time for celebration in the entertainment industry -- are now in jeopardy. On the other side, ABC Studios, CBS Paramount Network TV, Warner Bros. TV, 20th Century Fox TV and Universal Media Studios have started to terminate overall deals with writers and producers. Representatives of the terminated talent vow revenge. Thus, the end result of both sides continuing to draw blood from each other is that nothing is getting produced in Hollywood.

If both sides persist in continuing this fight, the obvious conclusion is that darker days for the industry lie ahead.

E. Barry Haldeman, one of my colleagues in the JMBM Entertainment Group, wrote an interesting op-ed piece for the Malibu Times on the WGA strike. You can read his piece here. As Barry writes, the principal issue preventing a deal with the writers seems to be how to handle, and divide revenues from, new media such as cell phones and the internet. Not surprisingly, each side is wary of giving much ground because of the potential ramifications as these new media become more popular. Time will only tell if the parties will compromise on their positions.

Producers Alan Ladd Jr. and Jay Kanter obtained a $3.2 million verdict against Warner Bros. Ladd and Kanter, under the Ladd Co., produced 12 films for Warner Bros., including Blade Runner, Chariots of Fire and the Police Academy movies. The case involves the practice of studios packaging or bundling films together when licensing or distributing those movies to other outlets. Ladd and Kanter claimed the Warner Bros. shortchanged them when it packaged those movies with less desirable films for distribution and assigned a license fee which did not reflect their films' actual worth. In a closely watched trial, the jury sided with Ladd and Kanter. Warner Bros. is expected to file post-trial motions to reduce the verdict and, if unsuccessful, to appeal.

Nestle USA won its appeal of a $15.6 million jury verdict against it in favor of a former model who posed for the label of its Taster's Choice coffee. The model asserted statutory and common law appropriation claims for the wrongful use of his image and violations of his right of publicity. A jury found Nestle liable for $333,000 in damages and over $15.3 million of Nestle's profits which the jury attributed to the use of the model's immage. The California Court of Appeal reversed.

The Court of Appeal's decision recites a few important principles. First, the opinion held that the single publication rule applied to these misappropriation claims. The impact of that holding is that the allegedly wrongful publication of an image gives rise only to one cause of action. Second, the court's opinion held that, for statute of limitations purposes, the discovery rule did not apply to those who had "a meaningful ability to discover the violation." The court directed the trial court to determine whether the model had such an ability to discover the alleged violations of his rights and to limit any claims to two years from the date the violations should be discovered.

Click here to view the court's opinion

The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Universal Pictures began a federal court trial on Tuesday in Los Angeles. The case is unique in part because the assistant director (Frank Davis) was fired from the movie "2 Fast 2 Furios" over the objections of the movie's director, John Singleton. The EEOC alleges that Davis' firing was because he is black. Universal denies the allegation. Singleton, who is also black, has told others that he suspected that race played a role in Davis' dismissal. Published reports indicate that Singleton's speculation about the motivation for Davis' firing will not be admissible. LA Times, June 12, 2007

YouTube has once again become a target of copyright infringement litigation. A Nashville-based music publisher filed a class action suit on June 6, 2007 against YouTube and its parent, Google, in Tennessee district court. The publisher claims that YouTube will not make its highly touted content identification program available unless a copyright holder signs an agreement with YouTube and become one of its "strategic partners." YouTube denies the allegations. View the complaint in Cal IV Entertainment v. YouTube here.