Defamation and social media expert lawyers. Best defamation solicitor

Internet Law Specialist Lawyers FREE CALL 0800 612 7211

Recently removed from the internet
What our clients say...
"Thank you Yair... Not only for saving me money but also for being so nice and helpful! "
“I just received a phone call from the service provider. They agreed to refund me but... Read More...
Contact our super friendly Social Media lawyers today!

Click HERE to Call Free for immediate help! 0800 612 7211

 

Every situation is different so by far the best way to find out how to respond to a social media legal issue is to speak to those who are most likely to have dealt with a situation similar to yours.
To find out how you can improve your reputation on the internet simply select one of the easy methods of contacting us.

 
Please use the form below to contact us.
We will respond as soon as possible.

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Or you can call us on our free hotline.

FREEPHONE  0800 612 7211

(+) 44 207 183 4 123 from outside the UK.

Or if you prefer you can email us to helpline (at) CohenDavis.co.uk.

TheInternet LawCentre

Insights from notable Digital Licensing cases

Insights from notable Digital Licensing cases

Insights from notable Digital Licensing cases

These cases demonstrate the range of legal issues that can arise in the context of media law, from fair use to the specifics of licensing and exclusivity agreements, to copyright infringement. They reflect the evolving nature of media law as it adapts to new technologies and distribution platforms.

Miramax v. New Line Cinema (2005)

Relativity Media LLC v. Netflix, Inc. (2016)

Miramax v. New Line Cinema (2005)

The Miramax v. New Line Cinema case in 2005 revolved around the film series "The Lord of the Rings."

The dispute arose from an agreement between Miramax and New Line Cinema regarding the film rights to the "The Lord of the Rings." Miramax, which initially held the film rights, had invested in the early development of the project. However, due to budgetary concerns and other issues, Miramax decided not to produce the films and instead transferred the rights to New Line Cinema.

The transfer agreement included a clause that entitled Miramax to a percentage of the profits from the films. After "The Lord of the Rings" films were released and became highly successful, Miramax claimed that New Line Cinema had underreported earnings and sought compensation for what they believed was their rightful share of the profits.

Miramax filed a lawsuit alleging that New Line Cinema had breached their contract and was withholding due profits. The case was significant because it highlighted the complexities of film rights agreements and profit-sharing in the film industry, particularly for high-stakes, high-revenue projects.

The lawsuit was eventually settled out of court, with the terms of the settlement undisclosed, but it underscored the importance of clear and enforceable agreements in film rights transactions and the potential disputes that can arise over profit distribution.

Relativity Media LLC v. Netflix, Inc. (2016)

The legal dispute between Relativity Media LLC and Netflix, Inc. in 2016 revolved around an issue of exclusive distribution rights in the context of bankruptcy proceedings. Relativity Media, a film studio, had entered into a licensing agreement with Netflix to distribute its films.

According to the agreement, Netflix had the exclusive rights to stream certain Relativity movies after their theatrical releases. The conflict arose when Relativity Media filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. During the bankruptcy proceedings, Relativity sought to prevent Netflix from streaming two of its films, "The Disappointments Room" and "Masterminds," before the agreed-upon release dates.

Netflix argued that their agreement allowed them to stream these films despite the bankruptcy filing, while Relativity contended that the release dates were pushed back due to the bankruptcy and that early streaming would violate the agreement and harm their potential box office performance.

The case was significant as it highlighted the complexities of licensing agreements in the context of bankruptcy. It raised questions about the enforceability of contracts and the rights of content distributors when a content provider undergoes financial restructuring.

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court initially ruled in favour of Relativity, granting an injunction to prevent Netflix from streaming the films before the new theatrical release dates. The court's decision underscored the impact of bankruptcy on existing contracts and the importance of adhering to the specific terms of content licensing agreements, especially regarding release timing in the film industry.

This case provided valuable insights into the legal challenges that arise when a content provider faces financial difficulties, and how such situations can affect agreements with distribution platforms like Netflix.

Call us free now on 08006127211 to book your consultation with one of our specialist media lawyers or click here for a call back.

Search the entire site
 

a flat out uncond

Signature cases

Our work featured on

Latest Articles

Explore this topic!