Famous Legal Liability Battles
Something that is not left ignored by the members of this industry is that sometimes people tend to believe that they were the ones who discovered the business and that they own everything. Others, rightly so, claim what belongs to them by suing the according party. That’s exactly what we’re going to talk about in this new blog post. Specifically three different cases that in one way or another impact the industry. The first one being Deadline.com vs. The Hollywood Reporter and their copyright infringement claim.
Apparently, according to Deadline.com’s parent company PMC, “an initial review of the complaint shows that it is replete with examples of stories that originated from widely-released press releases from publicists, or widespread confirmations from publicists to numerous outlets, including both The Hollywood Reporter and Deadline.com. To what The Hollywood Reporter says, “It is not copyright infringement to report these stories, even if on occasion Deadline.com posts them first.”
The Hollywood Reporter has had an ongoing growth, specifically 4.4 million visitors per month as measured by comSore in comparison to Deadline.com’s 1.5 million. Deadline.com has also accused The Hollywood Reporter of having openly offered job positions to PMC employees, to what THR has completely denied. In addition to another allegation regarding the code for a “carousel” feature on their website, which according to THR, was coded for them by a third-party vendor. They proceeded to remove said carousel feature from their webpage whilst they look into it.
My opinion.
I use The Hollywood Reporter to keep myself informed about the different stories that surface not only domestically but also internationally. At the beginning of my Master’s completion, however, I used Deadline.com. As I familiarized myself with the different webpages that dedicate themselves to keeping us informed about the current state of the industry and its everyday happenings, I found THR to be easier to access. And not only that, they gifted me with a free subscription for a year to their digital magazine. I guess I might be a bit biased, but the facts are that during the three months that I didn’t even use THR, Deadline.com didn’t even post anything on their Facebook page. THR did. I agree with them completely when they say that just because Deadline.com publishes a story first, doesn’t mean that any other publication is stealing the story from them. They are not the only website or periodical dedicated to show business.
They will be settling this case in court.
The Case:
Charlie Sheen filed a $100 million lawsuit against chuck Lorre and Warner Bros. on behalf of himself and Two and A Half Men’s production company 9th Step Productions, in Los Angeles Superior Court.
Officially placing blame on “Warner Bros. capitulating to Lorre’s egotistical desire to punish Mr. sheen…” and having nothing to do with sheen’s controversial comments about Mr. Lorre for “the cancelation of the remaining eight episodes of this season”.
Marty Singer, Sheen’s lawyer, says that the defendants fired Mr. Sheen “when he was willing, ready and able to proceed taping, but that had they used his ‘condition’ as cause to terminate his contract, it would’ve been a violation of the law.”
As of right now, all parties involved in this case are working towards a settlement in which Mr. Sheen will be heavily rewarded.
My opinion:
Honestly, I’ve never been much of a Charlie Sheen fan. The truth of the matter is that while he is the perfect actor for that role. Him as an employee is a liability. And the studio and Mr. Lorre did the right thing in firing him.
The case:
This is basically an abuse of power and inhumanity case. Mr. Malakhov filed a class action against the PR firm, one of the most successful ones in the business, for “deeming attendance at promotional events with clients to be ‘voluntary’, but informed its employees that failure to ‘volunteer… would negatively affect their ability to advance in their careers.”
As it turns out some employees were paid, but others, who worked without being compensated nor afforded proper meal and rest periods, were not. This class action demands back compensation, damages, attorney’s fees, and interest, plus an injunction prohibiting the firm from engaging in the complained acts. “Mr. Malakhov alleges that the post-regular-shift work constituted a violation of various California labor laws.”
As of Thursday, 27th of October, 2011, a federal judge turned down the requested injunction “because the lawsuit was brought by a former employee who would not benefit from such relief.”
My opinion:
Honestly, if someone goes through the trouble to sue a high profile PR company in the PR capital of the world, then something must be going on. The fact that the judge decided to do nothing in favor of the 1600 employees who, for fear of retaliation have not made any comments, speaks volumes about the justice system in the country. These claims are really dangerous to any company. Labor laws violation is no joke. Specially considering how much of a luxury a job is now a day.
What are your thoughts on these cases?
Hit me up in the comments down below…
No comments:
Post a Comment