Entertainment Legal News

UCLA Entertainment Law Symposium

Rather than give you a dry recitation of the various legislative proposals in Congress affecting copyright law, I’m going to a dry dissection of a January 5, 2003 L.A. Times editorial entitled “File Sharers: Don’t Crow Yet,” of which you all should have received a copy.  I decided to use this opportunity to discuss that editorial, which just represents so much that is wrong about the debate over piracy, copyright law, and online access to creative works.
 
Judging by the blasting the editorial gives them, the entertainment industries are facing a disastrous public relations situation.  The editorial implies they are technology Luddites, advocates legislation that is absolute anathema to them, accuses them of nefarious motives, celebrates their legal losses, sides with their opponents, and draws every possible inference against them. 
 
If this were an editorial from the San Francisco Chronicle or San Jose Mercury News, it wouldn’t seem so shocking.  After all, similar editorials have appeared in those papers for years as tensions flared between the technology and entertainment industries.  No, what is shocking is that the entertainment industries are now being completely lambasted by the editorial board for what is essentially their home town paper.
 
My concern is that this editorial is not aberrational, but represents the growing conventional wisdom on copyright issues.  And the fact that the public debate on copyright issues has become so skewed is troubling.
 
For the entertainment industries, it is a troubling indication that, despite their PR prowess, they have failed terribly in making their case to the public.  Personally, I find the editorial troubling because the conventional wisdom it represents is deeply flawed, and if followed, will result in disastrous policy-making. Read more at house.gov

Contact our Arkansas Entertainment Lawyers now and obtain a free case review!

	Did You Know?
	Rights are clearly defined Rights' are the expressed, granted permission by the owner of a particular work to an intended buyer, for the utilization of their property in the profitable redistribution of that material. The permission, if granted, may entail the right to employ the work in the designated medium in which it was intended for redistribution. Additionally, the Copyright Act protects the owner of a property from unauthorized use of their material.