Explore the vast range of titles available.

In today's complex media environment, aspiring filmmakers and new media artists are as vulnerable as swimmers in shark-infested waters. This user-friendly guide supplies creative artists with the essential legal concepts needed to swim safely with lawyers, agents, executives, and other experts in intellectual property and business law How do I copyright my screenplay? How can I clear rights for my film project? What can I do to avoid legal trouble when I produce my mockumentary? How do I ascertain whether a vintage novel is in the public domain? Is the trademark I've invented for my production company available? What about copyright and trademark rights overseas? If I upload my film to YouTube, do I give up any rights? Bill Seiter and Ellen Seiter answer these questions and countless others while also demystifying the fundamental principles of intellectual property. Clear and thorough, this plain-spoken and practical guide is essential for anyone seeking to navigate the rapidly changing media environment of today.

This essential handbook offers art professionals and collectors an accessible legal analysis of important principles in art law, as well as a practical guide to legal rights when creating, buying, selling and collecting art in a global market. Although the book is international in scope, there is a particular focus on the US as a major art centre and the site of countless key international court cases. This authoritative but accessible and wide-ranging volume is essential reading for arts advisors, collectors, dealers, auction houses, museums, investors, artists, attorneys and students of art and law.

Purpose of Review Loot boxes are gambling-like monetisation mechanics in video games that are purchased for opportunities to obtain randomised in-game rewards. Gambling regulation is increasingly being informed by insights from public health. Despite conceptual similarities between loot boxes and gambling, there is much less international consensus on loot box regulation. Various approaches to regulating loot boxes are reviewed via a public health framework that highlights various trade-offs between individual liberties and harm prevention. Recent Findings Many countries have considered regulation, but as yet only a few countries have taken tangible actions. Existing regulatory approaches vary greatly. More restrictively, Belgium has effectively ‘banned’ paid loot boxes and prohibits their sale to both children and adults. In contrast, more liberally, China only requires disclosure of the probabilities of obtaining potential rewards to provide transparency and perhaps help players to make more informed purchasing decisions. Most other countries (e.g., the UK) have adopted a ‘wait-and-watch’ approach by neither regulating loot box sales nor providing any dedicated consumer protection response. Industry self-regulation has also been adopted, although this appears to elicit lower rates of compliance than comparable national legal regulation. Summary Many potential public health approaches to loot box regulation, such as expenditure limits or harm-reducing modifications to loot box design (e.g., fairer reward structures), deserve further attention. The compliance and clinical benefits of existing interventions (including varying degrees of regulation, as adopted by different countries, and industry self-regulation) should be further assessed. The current international variation in loot box regulation presents opportunities to compare the merits of different approaches over time.

There is a distinction between a sports lawyer and all other types of practitioners. It requires a deep understanding of the nuances that largely affect athletes, their representatives, and companies providing products and services in the space. It also necessitates an acknowledgment of and ability to effectively communicate and craft relationships with power brokers who may provide financial services, accounting, managerial services, or the like in the specific space. How to Play the Game, by Miami-based attorney and sports agent Darren Heitner, is the go-to source for anyone interested in getting into the field of sports law. It discusses the laws that govern the sports industry, from contract drafting and negotiation to antitrust issues, intellectual property matters, and labor law concerns. It also discusses the role of players' associations, the power of sports commissioners, sports betting regulations, and more. But what makes it truly unique are the real-life case studies involving recognized professional and college sports figures as well as anecdotes from Darren's own experiences as a sports attorney, agent, and media spokesperson for college and professional sports industries. In addition, an appendix contains examples of legal documents--including professional contracts-with which any sports attorney/agent needs to be familiar. In short, if you want to play the game, you need to read How to Play the Game.Praise for the First Edition of How to Play the Game\"The subject matter related to Sports Law is immense. Much in the way International Law is hard to nail down, as virtually every area of law is present in the context of International Law,  Sports Law   is similar and encompasses many practice areas including, but not limited to, contract, tort, estate planning, intellectual property,  labor and employment law, anti-trust, family law, criminal law, litigation, negotiation . . . and the list goes on. If you are looking  for a summary of all of these practice areas in about 200 pages, I wish you luck finding it. If you are looking for a survey of topics relevant to your Sports Law practice, with small case studies to provide practical examples of issues you may encounter, then Darren has provided just that for you in his book How to Play the Game: What Every Sports Attorney Needs to Know. One builds a Sports Law practice, or any law practice, one brick at a time. This book is one brick, use it, and others, to build a strong foundation  for your practice.\"-Attorney Alexander Scott Dennison\"Mr. Heitner has set the bar with his work. This book is without a doubt the definitive go to piece in the industry. The in-depth knowledge, analysis and factual statements are 100% on-point. Every university with a Sports and/or Entertainment Law/ Management program should make How to Play the Game a mandatory read.\"-Travis Bell, Founder and CEO of The Seven Bridges Group

Loot boxes in video games can be purchased with real-world money in exchange for random rewards. Stakeholders are concerned about loot boxes’ similarities to gambling and their potential harms (e.g. overspending money and developing gambling problems). The previous Conservative UK Government decided to first try relying on industry self-regulation to address the issue, rather than to impose legislation. These self-regulations have since been published by the industry trade body, Ukie (UK Interactive Entertainment). Responding to many stakeholders’ desires for a transparent and independent assessment of their implementation, we assessed companies’ compliance with three empirically testable measures and also whether the rules were actively enforced. The 100 highest-grossing iPhone games were longitudinally examined both prior to the self-regulations coming into effect on 18 July 2024 (i.e. between January and June 2024) and after to check for potential improvement (i.e. between July and December 2024). Disappointingly, widespread non-compliance and non-enforcement were observed. Among games with loot boxes, none (0.0%) sought to obtain explicit parental consent prior to enabling loot box purchasing by under-18s. Only 23.5% disclosed loot box presence, and the few disclosures were all visually obscured and difficult to access. A mere 8.6% consistently disclosed the probabilities of obtaining different rewards for all loot boxes found. The rules were not enforced, contrary to Ukie’s promise: all of the games that were non-compliant before the self-regulations came into effect remained non-compliant many months later, despite Ukie and the Apple App Store having been provided with evidence of the contraventions and put on notice to delist those games if remedial actions were not forthcoming. Because Ukie itself cannot enforce these self-regulations, platforms (e.g. app stores), the advertising regulator and the consumer protection regulators must better enforce pre-existing rules to ensure adequate consumer protection as already promised. Video games and loot boxes are no longer novel; laws that apply to all industries must also be enforced against this one. Governments are advised against relying on industry self-regulation, especially after repeated demonstrations of its many failings. Stricter legal regulation of loot boxes should be adopted. Preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/3KNYB (date of in-principle acceptance: 25 March 2024).

Appellants argue that there is no statutory law nor case law that supports this proposition and thus, Appellants urge the Second Circuit on appeal to reverse the District Court's decision. Data General Corp. v. Grumman Sys. [...]Appellants hope that the Second Circuit will decline to follow the Ninth Circuit's suit and instead hold that a composition's copyright registration is not limited to its deposit copy, allowing the actual sound recording of the composition to aid in determination of whether an infringement of the underlying composition has occurred. 2. [...]cancellation, postponement, and/or change to the venue, artists, time, and/or date of the Event shall not entitle you to a refund or any other reduction in the Ticket price or compensation of any kind. The class action draws upon this history and statements made by the NYPD to support its argument for liability on counts of deception, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, false advertisement, unjust enrichment, and breach of contract and implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

Editors: Thomas J. Kliebhan, Gordon, Rees, Scully, Mansukhani, LLP Amanda Alasauskas, Swanson, Martin, & Bell Brian A. Rosenbaltt, Downey & Lenkov LLC Contributing Authors: Law Students: Tripp Burton (Indiana University Maurer School of Law) Chelsea Cohen (Loyola Law School) Alexis C. Hivner (The University of Memphis Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law) Kasey Hughes (DePaul University College of Law) Emma Johnson (University of Miami) Tyler Kennedy (Georgetown University) Colette Manahan (DePaul University College of Law) Beau Reeves (DePaul University) Andres Rodriguez Gomez (University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law) Attorneys: Thomas J. Caulfield (Erik M. Pelton & Associates) Joseph Esses (Gordon Law Group) Priscilla Fasoro (Covington & Burling) Kasey Hughes (DePaul University College of Law) Julia Rhieu Lifton (Covington & Burling) Alexa Tipton (Irwin IP) Caroline Waldo (Covington & Burling) There is Still Time for One More Dance: Revival of Hanagami v. Epic Games Lawsuit The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has granted renowned choreographer Kyle Hanagami (\"Hanagami\") another dance by reviving his lawsuit against the video game publisher Epic Games Inc. (\"Epic\") for direct and contributory infringement of a protectable and registered choreographic work. [...]the Ninth Circuit held that the district court erred when ruling that \"steps are unprotectable because they are relatively brief,\" and that \"short does not always equate to simple.\" [...]when determining the extent of copyright protection for choreographies, size is not all that matters, and that when comparing two works, in addition to poses, courts should evaluate other elements of the choreography such as, \"body position, body shape, body actions, transitions, use of space, timing, pauses, energy, canon, motif, contrast, and repetition.\" In Dawson v. Delaware, a Delaware jury convicted petitioner Dawson of first-degree murder and other crimes. In August, the New York Knicks filed a lawsuit in federal district court against the Toronto Raptors, and Raptors' personnel, over an alleged theft of the Knicks proprietary information.

Kanye & Wal-Marts Legal Battles On June 24, 2021, Kanye West and Yeezy LLC (collectively Yeezy) sued Walmart Inc. (Walmart) for unfair competition and unjust enrichment in the Superior Court of California Central District. A week before July 1st, Judge Claudia Wilken denied the NCAA's motion to dismiss based on the Supreme Court's decision in NCAA v. Alston. On July 26th, the plaintiffs in House filed an amended complaint which broadened the scope of damages to all potential earnings that were lost from the NCAA's denial of NIL rights to past studentathletes and added new admissions from the NCAA that providing NIL rights to student-athletes is actually beneficial for collegiate athletics. Within the past three years, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has delivered two competing opinions on the topic of music copyright infringement.