Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons^™

Spam Vs. Ms. Piggy: An Entertainment Law Cautionary Tale, Candi Henry

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

In terms of blockbusters, 1996 was a good year for film. Action-packed movies like Twister, Independence Day, and Mission Impossible competed for ticket sales with popular comedies Jerry Maguire, The First Wives Club, and The Birdcage. The critical favorite, The English Patient, also made a strong showing. Together, those films grossed almost $1.2 billion in domestic ticket sales alone, yet it was the modestly-performing family flick, Muppet Treasure Island that arguably made the biggest impact in entertainment law that year. That impact was not, however, the result of a landmark ruling. Rather, Hormel Foods Corporation v. Jim Henson Productions serves …

A Need For Heightened Scrutiny: Aligning The Ncaa Transfer Rule With Its Rationales, Jonathan Jenkins

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

This note will explore the traditional rationales offered by the NCAA in implementing the Transfer Rule and suggests that these rationales are not served by the current Rule. Part I frames the environment in which the Transfer Rule exists by tracing the history of the NCAA. Part II explores the traditional rationales offered for justifying the Transfer Rule. In McHale v. Cornell University, the NCAA suggested that the purposes of the Transfer Rule are "(1) to prevent transfers solely for athletic reasons, (2) to avoid exploitation of student-athletes, and (3) to allow transfer students time to adjust to their new …

Dividing Hedging And Gambling: Legal Implications Of Derivative Instruments, Christopher C. H. Chen

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

The past three decades have seen the emergence in themarket of many different types of “derivativeinstruments”, ranging from futures, forwards, options,and swaps1 to some other hybrid instruments2 orsynthetic transactions3 . Along with insurance,derivative instruments help market participants notonly to hedge various types of risks but also to engagein market speculation. A derivative transaction couldserve the purpose of avoiding large losses (i.e. hedging)as well as earning a windfall (i.e. speculation). As such,one question arises: Is there any difference betweengambling and derivative trading?

Inducers And Authorisers: A Comparison Of The Us Supreme Court's Grokster Decision And The Australian Federal Court's Kazaa Ruling, Jane C. Ginsburg, Sam Ricketson

Faculty Scholarship

On June 27, 2005, the US Supreme Court announced its much-awaited decision in MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster Ltd. A few months after this, the Federal Court of Australia handed down its decision at first instance in relation to parallel litigation in that country concerning the KaZaa file sharing system. Both decisions repay careful consideration of the way in which the respective courts have addressed the relationship between the protection of authors' rights and the advent of new technologies, particularly in relation to peer-to-peer networks.

In the Grokster case, songwriters, record producers and motion picture producers alleged that two popular …