Don’t Blame Charlie Sheen…Blame Yourselves

Posted on March 10, 2011 by Kenneth Tate II

Charlie Sheen has stolen all entertainment headlines and set the record for the fastest person to ever reach 1 million followers on Twitter in the Guinness Book of World Records.

For the regular consumer witnessing the events of the past two weeks, Sheen appears to be a nightmare of rants and raves, drug abuse, and sexually deviant behavior.  For Entertainment agents, managers, script writers, networks other than CBS, and studios other than Warner Bros, Charlie Sheen is the quintessential blue print for the new age of maximizing potential for talent into the next decade.  Despite the fact the hit show “Two and a Half Men” has ended with the release of Sheen, Sheen effectively created a new conversation in future business negotiations within his career.  Now that he has nearly 2.5 million Twitter followers, he has created tangible proof that he has not lost his following and Charlie Sheen as a brand name is still big business.  His leverage with studios and networks will be unlimited now that he has both established movie and television sitcom careers, and has demonstrated his ability to deliver in a reality television show format hosted by Ustream via Twitter, in which Sheen sounds off on leaders of CBS:

Even the Red Cross has jumped on the Charlie Sheen bandwagon, declaring via Twitter on March 2nd:

We may not collect #tigerblood, but we know our donors & volunteers have fierce passion for doing good! #RedCrossMonth

What we are witnessing is flatly amazing considering the depth and severity of allegations that Sheen has survived throughout his career.  According to Perez Hilton.com, Charlie Sheen had faced the following allegations:

1990 – Sheen shot then-fiancee Kelly Preston with a .22 gun…accidentally of course…

1994 – Sued by a UCLA student for allegedly striking her in the head after “she refused to have sex.”

1996 – Arrested after adult film star girlfriend Brittany Ashland claimed Sheen “knocked her out and threatened to kill her.”

2006 – Denise Richards filed for divorce from Sheen and claimed he threw chairs at her and threatened to kill her, multiple times

2009 – Allegedly strangled Brooke Mueller, held a knife to her throat, and threatened to kill her, on Christmas Day

2010 – Adult film star Capri Anderson claimed Charlie “put his hands around her neck and threatened to kill her”

2011 – Allegedly threatened to kill his ex Brooke Mueller…again

You don’t have to live in a Sober Valley Lodge to realize that Sheen was not a model citizen but remained in the spotlight the past twenty years because the American consumers and those tuning in from around the world forgive the lifestyles of A-list actors; however, reality television is produced more frequently than any other form of television show because of the ratio of production cost to revenue generated.  As a result, this forgiveness has extended to unprecedented amounts and has resulted in common people such as the case of MTV’s Jersey Shore to become famous for socially unacceptable behavior they display on camera.  Sheen’s rebellious approach to CBS by naming specific individuals within the corporation is not typical A-list actor behavior, and has turned him into the people’s champ.  His “twitter trends” known simply as “winning” and “tiger blood” have become long running jokes that have been copied and repeated by millions throughout daily life when they log off their computers.

Sheen is a pioneer as an A-List actor who is embracing social media as a link into the “reality” aspect of the entertainment industry.  Aside from releasing his personal live performance on Ustream, he has advertised for a “social media intern” to begin for 8 weeks this summer.

What Sheen is accomplishing is an A-list actor’s parallel to a professional athlete recovering from a scandal and still #winning.  What we are witnessing is Shaq leaving the Lakers and Kobe Bryant striving to win more championships after being accused of rape.  Sheen is no stranger to public controversy and he has demonstrated that even when large conglomerates such as CBS and Warner Brothers part ways with him, he still has millions of fans.  The bottom line is determined by none other than us, the consumers, who continue to value the pizzazz, humor, and wit Sheen exudes on the screen.

Sheen’s most recent interviews have been described as “manic episodes” by some psychotherapists.  In a world such as Hollywood, where the fast life of cocaine, sexually liberated women, and endless amounts of cash spent on alcohol is common place for men in Sheen’s position, one might view his fast chatter and declaration that he has “tiger blood” as the cry out of a man who is in need of help.  Until consumers turn off the television, Sheen’s portrayal of a man on the road to recovery is not only entertainment, but also big business.

Posted in Entertainment Business | 2 Comments

Entertaining Super Bowl XLV Props Making Waves

Posted on February 3, 2011 by Darren Heitner

As per usual, the Las Vegas casinos and online odds makers have outdone themselves at Super Bowl time. As Super Bowl XLV approaches, a quick gander at the Super Bowl prop lines found at BetUs shows fans that there is a tasty menu to choose from.

The chat around the water cooler has already started as to whether Christina Aguilera, who is singing the national anthem at the big game on Sunday, will be wearing a cowboy hat or not. With North Texas hosting the Super Bowl and the game being played at Cowboys Stadium, there is the possibility.

The second biggest subject regarding the pop star is how long she’ll hold the last note of the anthem. Odds makers have set the line at 6.5 seconds but knowing the crooner and how she likes to show off her outstanding voice, there’s a very good chance that that last note will take longer than 6.5 to sing.

Speaking of performers, the Black Eyed Peas will be performing during halftime and one of the props for them is whether Fergie, the female member of the hip hop group, will be wearing a football jersey. Obviously, there’s the option to wear a Cowboys jersey, since the Dallas Cowboys are the home team of the venue and are America’s team, or she could also be wearing a jersey of either the Green Bay Packers or Pittsburgh Steelers, which are the two teams taking part in the NFL’s Championship Game. There are some rumors that she may be wearing a half-and-half jersey with half of one teams jersey and have of the other’s as to not appear biased. In case you are wondering, she was born in California so she may not have allegiances to either team.

Check out the prop bets for the big as there are literally hundreds to choose from. The Super Bowl will take place this Sunday, February 6th.

Posted in Entertainment Business, Lead Story | Leave a comment

Australians in Hollywood…What Lies in Store for 2011?

Posted on December 28, 2010 by Gene Goodsell

(Mad) Mel Gibson, Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe, Naomi Watts, Hugh Jackman, Cate Blanchett, Heath Ledger, Eric Bana, Geoffrey Rush, Toni Collette, Simon Baker, Isla Fisher, etc … no other country has dominated Hollywood the way Australia has, but what lies in store for the future (and specifically, 2011)?

It’s no secret that the ‘big four’ Hollywood talent agencies and a few of the large LA management firms have been scouting for talent ‘down-under’ since Australian’s became prominent in the 80s and 90s. However, it’s not just our actors that are sought after … Jane Campion, Baz Luhrmann and Geoffrey Wright are all considered outstanding directors (to name a few) and we continue to produce excellent ‘behind-the-camera’ talent.

The twelve top Aussie actors in Hollywood appeared in films that had made $US8.94 billion since 2000 (according to a study from August 2009).

Australians are recognised for the solid ‘soapie’ training they receive in Australia (think ‘Neighbours’ and ‘Home and Away’).

Will this trend continue? Yes, if Mia Wasikowska (‘Alice in Wonderland’), Sam Worthington (‘Avatar’) and Chris and Liam Hemsworth’s success is anything to go by.

On the Australian film front, Rupert Murdoch (the head of Fox) is Australian, and was instrumental in facilitating the filming of the ‘Matrix’ and ‘Star Wars’ II and III in Sydney. If the Australian dollar falls against the US dollar, filming in Australia may yet again become an attractive proposition for US studios, especially given the presence of a more than generous 40% tax rebate.

Guy Pearce believes the appeal of actors from Australia stems from the fact that the continent is “built on a convict history. We started with nothing” he says.  There’s no shortage of twinkling convicts in Pearce’s latest film, the gripping indie epic Animal Kingdom, which won the World Cinema Jury Prize at the 2010 Sundance Film Festival.

In fact, the depth of talent in Australia is so great, that a prominent Australian talent agency recently opened an office in a city not usually associated with the arts. Australia also has a rapidly expanding population – this should mean that there will be no shortage of talent in the near future.

Gene Goodsell is Australian and works for Abrams Artists Agents in Los Angeles. Prior to this, he worked as a talent agent for the Sydney branch of a global sports and entertainment firm and before this, was a commercial lawyer in Sydney and London.

Posted in Entertainment Business | Tagged | Leave a comment

Negotiating Theatrical Deals in a Digital Environment

Posted on November 27, 2010 by Gene Goodsell

In California, talent agents are regulated by s. 1700 of the California Labor Code (the “Code”) and are required to be licensed. Other professions that are required to be licensed are doctors and attorneys-at-law.  The regulations require, amongst other things, for talent agents to maintain a trust account and submit the agency’s form of talent agreement for approval by the Labor Commissioner. Together, Guild regulations and the provisions of the Code govern the activities of talent agents in California.

Many managers claim that they can solicit employment on their client’s behalf. However, under the Code, managers can only negotiate employment agreements if done “in conjunction with and at the request of, a licensed talent agent”.

The primary role of an entertainment attorney is to protect his client with respect to the legal aspects of a deal. As such, clients stand to benefit where they engage the services of a talent agent who has a law degree and has also practised as a lawyer.

With regards to the art of deal-making in the current age, there are many different opinions as to how negotiations should be conducted.  Some common principles espoused by talent agents in the relevant literature are:

  1. To always leave your adversaries dignity intact – you never know when you will be negotiating with them again.
  2. Only commence negotiations with regards to a project when you are certain that it will be a commercial/critical success.
  3. Know what your client’s walk-away point is.
  4. Studios negotiate according to precedent. Know how much they will bend/what they will be willing to pay.
  5. Form relationships with people who you will end up negotiating with. When there is trust and respect, a deal can often be reached that is fair and reasonable.

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE

The emergence of reality programming has meant that TV series budgets are shrinking. Gen Y are using the Internet, mobile phones etc at an unprecedented rate and this means that more and more advertising dollars are being directed towards these communication mediums. In addition to this, those watching TV are increasingly using technology such as TiVo to skip over commercials.

Branding and merchandising is also becoming a huge source of income for talent agencies. Packaging a celebrity personality creates strong brand recognition which equates to increased revenue.

Studios and networks are attempting to expand the scope of required services from projects to include work for the Internet, video games, extended content etc.  Obviously, talent agencies need to be allowed to participate in the revenues generated by these ancillary areas.

In the current environment, a talent agent will need to consider every possible source of commercial exploitation of a project, including: pay-per-view, VOD, electronic sell-through, online and digital distribution, cellular and wireless distribution, live attractions, video games, ringtones, publishing, merchandising, commercial tie-ins … what’s next?!

Gene works in the Los Angeles office of Abrams Artists Agency. He is a member of the Beverly Hills Bar Association, has practised commercial (including entertainment) law in Sydney and London, as well as working as a talent agent for a Sydney firm. He has a business degree, a law degree with honours, a post-graduate diploma in legal practice and has completed six subjects of a Masters of Laws.

Posted in Entertainment Agents, Entertainment Law | Leave a comment

Institute On Entertainment Law & Business At USC – Issues For Talent Agents

Posted on November 8, 2010 by Gene Goodsell

On Saturday, October 23, I attended the Institute on Entertainment Law & Business at the USC Gould School of Law, which included a lunchtime address by Michael Lynton, CEO and Chairman of Sony Pictures Entertainment.

Although the Institute had a heavy legal focus, there were numerous poignant issues highlighted, which impact upon the practice of a talent agent.

One of these issues was the rise of India and in particular, China, on the world movie stage. This is an issue that I have written about before: (http://entertainmentagentblog.com/2009/09/28/entertainment-china/ and http://entertainmentagentblog.com/2009/07/27/the-rise-of-asian-cinema/).

CAA and WME Entertainment’s establishment of a Beijing office is testament to the large revenue streams being generated out of China. The Chinese Government has stated that they want to build as many cinema screens as the US (at the moment, they are second only to the US in the number of traditional movie and IMAX screens that they have).

Rand Holston from CAA stated that CAA is experiencing considerable success representing Chinese film stars in Beijing. The cost for CAA of setting up an office in Beijing was in the vicinity of USD 5 – 10 million. However, Chinese movies are very popular and generate considerable revenues, which was a major reason for CAA establishing an office there.

US producers are also experiencing considerable success making films in partnership with the Chinese (for example, where Chinese companies contribute development funds).

There is no doubt that the Chinese film market is still very domestic-centric and the Chinese Government has a strict censorship system in place. However, China has a population that is approaching 1.5 billion, so any form of investment is bound to reap some kind of reward.

The Chinese State Administration of Radio, Film and Television has predicted that box office revenue will exceed USD 4.5 billion by 2015 and the US, as well as other countries and organisations are lobbying intensely for China to remove the restrictions on the number of foreign films that are allowed to be shown domestically. Once this restriction is lifted, the value of the Chinese market to Hollywood will be enormous.

As Holston stated, there are impediments for agents to doing business in China. These include:

  • the lack of an established, stable legal system (let alone a specialized body of ‘entertainment law’);
  • an unpredictable Government; and
  • the need for Westerners to have pre-existing relationships with influential Chinese decision-makers ‘on-the-ground’ in China.

Despite the presence of these issues, the Chinese market will continue to generate eye-watering revenue figures and given the low cost of labour in China, will continue to become more and more attractive to Hollywood as a centre for investment.

Gene Goodsell is an ‘agent-in-training’ with Abrams Artists Agency in Los Angeles, has a law degree with honours, a business degree, a post-graduate diploma in legal practice and is currently completing a Masters of Laws. He has practised as a commercial lawyer in Sydney and London.

Posted in Entertainment Business, Entertainment Law, Lead Story | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Future Of Movies? Digital!

Posted on September 13, 2010 by Gene Goodsell

There is no aspect of film making that is evolving faster, or as successfully as digital film making and its offshoots.

In June 1999, Twentieth Century Fox released George Lucas’ digitally mastered Star Wars: Episode 1 – The Phantom Menace. This was the first time that a major studio released a film digitally.

Digital film making represents a huge breakthrough in the way films are produced. In fact, digital film making has been compared to the arrival of sound in 1927.

Digital film making provides tremendous cost savings during production and in post-production. Film makers are not burdened with servicing the bottom line requirements of banks, studios, insurers, completion guarantors, foreign sales companies and distributors.

New delivery systems for entertainment content are continually emerging. Apart from the traditional means of distributing films and TV, programming can now be delivered by digital methods such as delivering TV directly to the home (DirecTV), or over the Internet, which is used to deliver such online streaming services such as Lion’s Gate/Trimark’s CinemaNow.

Where a digital distributor wants to exhibit a movie over the Internet on its website, over DSL systems, or via a private, closed delivery system, they will provide a producer with a distribution agreement.

There are a number of factors that a producer should be aware of when negotiating a distribution agreement.

1. The Licensing Period

Your license term for digital exploitation will depend on what other rights (if any) you have previously licensed. If you have had no previous exploitation, try to negotiate the license for a period of six months so that you can reassess the digital marketplace in the not too distant future.

2. Advertising

The digital distributor will usually want to use the names, voices, likenesses and photographs of actors for their own marketing purposes. You should be careful not to grant rights to the digital distributor that are not available under your various talent agreements.

One provision that a producer should ask for is a commitment on behalf of the digital distributor to advertise the movie in a negotiated manner.

3. License Fee

Obtaining an advance against royalties for a digital license is difficult. If an advance is not possible, a producer should ask for a large share of the gross revenue for downloads, streaming etc (ask for around 50%).

Also, ask for a share of advertising revenues associated with the viewing of your product. If relevant, also ask for stock options and the right to purchase stock at less than market rates. Specify the minimum rates to be charged for downloads and viewings. It is absolutely crucial that you make sure you are clear as to how your share of royalties from subscriptions are to be calculated.

You should receive monthly statements within 60 days detailing all relevant financial details associated with the digital distribution. The distribution agreement should have a provision allowing you to audit the digital distributer’s financial records. It is wise to negotiate for the digital distributor to pay for the cost of an audit.

4. Cross-links

A provision should be included in the distribution agreement requiring cross-linking of the digital distributor’s site with your official site as well as the right to sell merchandise from your own site.

5. Delivery of materials

It is advisable to attempt to get the territorial distributor to pay for subtitled versions of the product that may be required.

The digital distributor should agree not to authorize any copies of the sub-master to be made without your prior written consent and should agree to keep the motion picture sub-master secure during the license period and agree to destroy any encoded and compressed versions of the movie at the conclusion of the license period.

6. The protection of intellectual property

A producer should reserve all rights in relation to their product and any other software or intellectual property.

7. Breach

A common provision in a digital licensing agreement provides for a reasonable notice period for breaches on either side but in the event of breach on behalf of the digital distributor, you waive your right to any injunctive relief, the right to terminate the agreement or seek recision. The only remedy would be an action at common law for damages.

*          *          *          *

The digital delivery of motion pictures will rapidly expand over the next few years. Digital pricing, territorial limitations, the issue of exclusivity and appropriate license periods will become more generic and a set of even more specialized standard terms for digital exploitation will emerge.

Gene Goodsell LLB (Hons) B Bus (Accounting) Post Grad Dip LP FTIA has experience working as an entertainment lawyer and agent/manager. Gene can be contacted at ggoodsell@navitasmgmt.com

Please note that the contents of this article are predominantly based on US law and the information in this article is not intended in any way to be construed as legal advice but only as information of a general nature.

Posted in Entertainment Business, Entertainment Law | Leave a comment

Talent Agency Scams

Posted on August 9, 2010 by Darren Heitner

For teenagers wanting fame and fortune (and let’s face it, whose teenager doesn’t fit into this category?), there is an all too popular scam which, while not new by any means, can devastate a wannabe star, both financially and emotionally. It goes something like this: con artists posing as legitimate talent agencies advertise on television, radio, or in the paper looking for the “next big star.” Sure enough, when eager applicants call the provided number, they’re assured that they’ll be trained and “guaranteed” a prestigious career in the entertainment agency, usually in exchange for a large, upfront payment. Of course, these promises rarely materialize, and any training that clients receive is nominal. Here are a few good ways to determine if your talent agency is the real deal or simply part of a scam, out to rob you of your hard earned money.

Guarantees

As most of us know, there are never any guarantees in the entertainment industry. If a talent agent guarantees that you’ll be the next big star or that you can have your pick of roles when you’ve completed the requisite training, be wary.

Pressure Tactics

Studies have shown that high pressure sales tactics that urge you to sign right away are successful because they eliminate the time you need to consider something objectively and with a critical eye. It’s never wise to make a large financial decision quickly, and chances are, if someone’s pushing you to do just that, it’s because they know that you’ll walk away if you decide to take some time to think about it. Do yourself a favor and at least consider your options before you give into someone’s high pressure sales pitch.

Demand for Upfront Payment

Most legitimate talent agencies, particularly in Hollywood, work on commission, not for an upfront amount of cash. If your agency of choice is demanding a large payment before they even start working for you, chances are, it’s a scam. Some legitimate agencies do require fees for photos, promotional materials or other “start up” costs, but they’ll be more than willing to show you a list of these charges and explain each one.

Want a surefire way to avoid these scams once and for all? If you or your child is thinking about getting into show business in any capacity and are in search of a talent agent, be sure to ask anyone you interview if he or she has a current talent industry bond. The talent agency bond is a guarantee that the talent agency purchases from a bond company to demonstrate its willingness to abide by laws and regulations governing the industry. As one can imagine, talent agency bonds are very common types of California surety bonds, but most (if not all) talent agencies in the US are required to have one by state law. The best part is that finding a talent agency with a current surety bond costs you nothing but a little time and can pay off with plenty of peace of mind later.

This is a guest post by Kevin Kaiser, a principal at SuretyBonds.com, where they are committed to educating consumers about fraud tactics and how to avoid them.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

In the Immortal Words of Gary Gilmore and NIKE, “[Just] Do It.”

Posted on June 20, 2010 by David Greene

“Just do it.” This is one of the world’s most famous trademarks, and any reader will know that products bearing the phrase are NIKE products. However, not many people know where this phrase comes from.

The phrase, “Just do it,” was thought up by the advertising agency, Wieden and Kennedy. Wieden and Kennedy is an independent ad agency, started in 1982. It is located in Portland, Oregon, and is famous for its work for NIKE. Dan Wieden, one of the founders of Wieden and Kennedy, credits an interesting source for the creation of the phrase, “Just do it.”

On a not so unrelated note, a man was executed in Utah last Friday morning. Ronnie Lee Gardner was executed by firing squad on Friday, June 18, 2010. When asked if he had any last words, he replied, “I do not. No.” Does anyone think that the last words of a condemned murderer are ripe grounds for trademark goodwill? In Ronnie Lee’s case, perhaps not. But Utah’s death row is the source of the NIKE trademarked phrase, “Just do it.”

In 1972, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional. In 1976, the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in a case called Gregg v. Georgia, and Utah immediately wanted to put down one of its inmates who had very recently been convicted of armed robbery and murder. This man’s name was Gary Gilmore, and he would be the first to die under the reinstated death penalty.

Gilmore murdered a gas station employee and a hotel manager. The murders took place after car thefts, assault, and robbery. Growing up, he struggled. His mother and father told him that he was illegitimate, and that he was actually the son of Harry Houdini. His father earned a living selling advertising space in magazines, perhaps helping to secure Gilmore’s place as the source of a world famous trademark.

On January 17, 1977, Gilmore was executed by firing squad. He requested that, following his execution, his eyes be used in corneal transplants. It is rumored that Gilmore’s uncle smuggled some Jack Daniels whiskey into the prison for Gilmore to imbibe prior to execution.

After Gilmore was shot by the firing squad, his brother reported that five holes were left in the body, rather than four. Thus, the firing squad did not have the traditional “blank” loaded into one of the guns. In the memoirs of the brother, titled Shot in the Heart, “the state of Utah, apparently, had taken no chances on the morning that it put my brother to death.” When Gilmore was asked for his final words, he said, “Let’s do it.”

This phrase became famous in pop culture. Gilmore’s life (and death) became the basis for a movie, where Gilmore was played by Tommy Lee Jones. Gilmore inspired one of Jack Nicholson’s performances, in a movie called The Postman Always Rings Twice. An episode of Saturday Night Live featured a skit with a Christmas song satire called, “Let’s Kill Gary Gilmore for Christmas.” Gilmore inspired a UK top twenty hit, called “Gary Gilmore’s Eyes.” In a deleted scene of an episode of Seinfeld, Jerry says, “Well, in the immortal words of Gary Gilmore, ‘Let’s do it.’” In an episode of the television show Roseanne, Darlene is asked if she is ready to get married, and she says the same thing that Seinfeld said, quoting Gilmore.

While this list of references to Gilmore is not exhaustive, it is certainly highlighted by Wieden and Kennedy’s use of the phrase, “Let’s do it,” when crafting NIKE’s “Just do it.” Gary Gilmore, the convicted murderer and armed robber, who gave away his corneas, got drunk before getting shot, and was lucid enough immediately before being shot to use a very catchy phrase, would live on in the goodwill of NIKE.

When an article about Gilmore’s death caught the eye of Dan Wieden, he changed the contours of the phrase slightly, and it became, “Just do it.” Thus, a condemned man, who was drunk, who donated his eyes, and was in a rush to just do it (i.e., be shot by five bullets), inspired Dan Wieden to create NIKE’s famous trademarked phrase. One of the most popular phrases in the world has a dark pedigree that seems to have faded over time. The “goodwill” attached to the phrase is likely worth billions.

Posted in Entertainment Law, Lead Story | Tagged , | 2 Comments

The Current State of the Industry

Posted on April 25, 2010 by Gene Goodsell

It was only a little more than a year ago that Premier Talent Group’s CEO, James J Jones, authored the now infamous email, “The State of the Industry”. The email attempted to prepare clients for tough times ahead, due to dire economic circumstances and labor disagreements.

Considering some of the “Bottom Lines” Jones covers in his email, let’s take a brief look at the industry now:

Due to the lack of studio feature film production, BOTH film and TV actors are competing for a limited number of jobs in the episodic and pilot environments.

Production companies are currently doing everything possible to diminish costs and risk.  This means producing low risk films with solid scripts, good marketing and within certain genres. In other words, they are taking a very conservative approach.

The reality is that even though the US economy is slowly recovering, a rash, imprudent decision could cost someone their job.

The economic conditions are forcing the industry to be as ‘thin’ as possible.

Reality TV is all the rage – why? Because it can be produced for a low cost and usually generates solid revenue. However, even reality TV has suffered from the impacts of the GFC. The past year saw many production budgets cut and large projects postponed.

A state of flux

Meanwhile, MGM is on the auction block and Miramax is now part of Walt Disney.  It’s important to remember that MGM fetched $4.8bn when it was bought in 2005 by its current owners Sony, Comcast, Texas Pacific Group and Providence Equity Partners. DVD sales are also in decline. The introduction of DVD rental kiosks such as Red Box, have eroded traditional DVD sales figures.

More platforms = more content = more revenue!

Many new technologies are being introduced to encourage viewer participation and increase revenue for studios. For example, increasing viewers control over when and how they view films in their home. Studios are also looking at gaining more information about individual consumer preferences via electronic devices (such as the Internet and through cell phones) in order to tailor service offerings to consumers.

One only needs to look at the recent LA Times article on digital 3-D to see where the future of the industry lies: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-ca-3d-20100425,0,3625039.story

There’s also no doubt that making it possible for viewers to see films such as Avatar in 3D only helped boost ticket sales and revenue for Fox.

Moving forward …

The GFC started in earnest in 2007 … things are improving – the US and world economy are getting stronger. More money is being invested into projects and the effects are being seen.

For the time being though, solid defense is still winning the game.

Gene Goodsell is a lawyer and agent currently based in Sydney, Australia.

Posted in Entertainment Business, Lead Story | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Newzbin Loss is a Win for All

Posted on April 6, 2010 by Justin Herzig

In a court case between The Motion Picture Association (MPA) and Newzbin, the High Court has ruled in favor of the MPA and provided much needed clarity to UK copyright law.

In a court case similar to those against Kazaa and The Pirate Bay, the High Court had the duty of determining the law on “internet intermediaries” that allow users to host and download illegal content, even if they may not be supplying it themselves.  The High Court has declared that Newzbin is liable for the copyright infringement of its users as it did “authorize” the downloading by providing a system that encouraged illegal behavior.

Prior to this ruling, UK ISP’s, indexing services, and other online service providers were treading on murky waters, not knowing the true scope of the law due to the lack of any test court cases.  Companies formerly had nothing but a physical tape-to-tape copying case to answer any of their copyright infringement questions.  Silencing those concerns, the High Court has provided enough information to clarify all potential issues.

The High Court held that most of the companies should continue acting as they previously have; they should proceed with “notice and takedown” policies and also implement them.  The High Court stressed the importance of the call to action.  Newzbin was successful on the first front in that it posted warnings telling its users not to infringe on copyright law.  However, their true actions were described as “window dressing” in that the company’s behavior rarely matched its rhetoric as they did little to remove any illegal content from users.

This result should surprise no one, but will provide welcome clarity to European law.

Posted in Entertainment Law, Lead Story | Tagged | Leave a comment