HB Media Minute

HB Media Minute is moving! This is our final episode on this podcast page. Moving forward, you can find our new episodes at The Legal Landscape [Hyperlink to the new show page on Apple or Spotify, not buzz sprout]. Thank you to all our loyal listeners, and we hope you'll continue to follow us over at the Legal Landscape!

Today we're talking about Jack Daniels vs VIP Products or as it could and maybe should be called: Jack Daniels vs a company that makes a whiskey themed chew toy for dogs.While it sounds like a joke, it's actually a crucially important case that spans a decade where the Supreme Court reversed a 9th circuit decision. Today, Michael lambert who is an Austin-based member of the firm's intellectual property group is talking to IP Partner Rich Rochford in our New York office. 

Today, the head of our Haynes Boone Media and Entertainment Practice Group, Laura Prather, will interview Susan Coughtrie, Co-Founder of the UK Anti-SLAPP Coalition, about the developments in implementing protections against SLAPP suits in the U.K. and how we got here. Laura is an experienced trial and appellate lawyer who has litigated against SLAPPs in courts across the country and has advocated for and been instrumental in the passage of Anti-SLAPP laws throughout the U.S. recently returning from a stint as a Fulbright Scholar studying global freedom of expression issues. Susan serves as Director of the Foreign Policy Center and author of the report “Unsafe for Scrutiny: Examining the pressures faced by journalists uncovering financial crime and corruption around the World.” A former journalist, Susan has a strong background in human rights advocacy, and her report swayed public opinion by exposing how reporters face risks to their freedom and security, from vexatious lawsuits (SLAPPs) to violence for exposing wrongdoing. Susan was instrumental in establishing the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe and the UK Anti-SLAPP Coalition and has helped to expose the devastating impact SLAPP suits can have on NGO's, protestors, and others who speak truth to power. 

Today, the head of our Haynes Boone media and entertainment practice group, Laura Prather, will interview Charlie Holt, Founder and Co-Chair of the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe about the developments in implementing protections against SLAPP suits in Europe and how we got here. Laura is an experienced trial and appellate lawyer who has litigated against SLAPPs in courts across the country and has advocated for and been instrumental in the passage of Anti-SLAPP laws throughout the U.S., recently returning from a stint as a Fulbright Scholar studying global freedom of expression issues. Charlie serves as  Legal Counsel for Campaigns for Greenpeace International and UK Campaigns Manager for English PEN. He has a strong background in human rights advocacy and a thematic expertise in freedom of expression and the right to protest. Charlie was instrumental in establishing the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe and the UK Anti-SLAPP Coalition and has personal experience through his work at Greenpeace in the devastating impact SLAPP suits can have on NGO's, protestors, and others who speak to power.

In a copyright case closely watched by content creators, the U.S. Supreme Court held, 7-2, that the first fair use factor—“the purpose and character of the use” —weighed against Andy Warhol's use of Lynn Goldsmith's black-and-white photograph of Prince to create a colorful silk-screen illustration of the musician that was later licensed to Vanity Fair without Goldsmith's consent. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the majority, first explained that courts analyzing the first fair use factor should balance “the degree to which the use has a further purpose or different character” against the “nature of the use,” whether commercial or nonprofit. Under that rubric, the Court next found that even though Warhol's illustration “adds new expression to Goldsmith's photograph,” the first fair use factor favored Goldsmith because the works shared “substantially the same commercial purpose”—Goldsmith's photograph and Warhol's illustration were both “portraits of Prince used to depict Prince in magazine stories about Prince.”

Following a brief hiatus, the HB Media Minute podcast is back, and we've got a fun one today. The topic: a review of an Arizona Supreme Court ruling in April that was a big win for free speech. The case had interesting facts — pitting a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate against the host of a radio show in Arizona called The Conservative Circus — and raises important Constitutional issues about the extent to which citizens are free to offer their views of political candidates. Best of all we have the winning Haynes Boone legal team with us today to break down the ruling and what it means for First Amendment law: Austin-based Partner Laura Prather, chair of the firm's Media Law Practice, and Associate Michael Lambert.

In the latest HB Media Minute podcast, Associate Michael Lambert discusses laws in Texas and Florida that impose transparency requirements and limit the ability of social media platforms to moderate certain third-party content. The laws were enacted in response to decisions made to remove posts and de-platform some users, such as former President Donald Trump. Michael will summarize pending cases challenging the constitutionality of the Texas and Florida laws, and analyze how the U.S. Supreme Court might rule if called on to decide the cases.  

In HB Media Minute, we take a look back at the famous defamation trial between movie stars and former spouses Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. The daily coverage of the trial has subsided but there are still many important legal lessons that can be drawn from the case about asserting and defending defamation claims. Haynes Boone Associate Michael Lambert will analyze some of the competing claims in Depp v. Heard, the jury's verdict, and some of the issues that are likely to be reviewed in an appeal of the verdict. 

Fresh off Elon Musk's purchase of Twitter, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear two cases that could have a huge impact on how social media companies moderate and recommend content on their platforms. On the latest HB Media Minute, Haynes Boone Associate Michael Lambert discusses the two Supreme Court cases, which involve disputes over a federal law that generally protects Internet platforms like Twitter from liability over content posted by users. The federal law, known as Section 230, has attracted many critics, including Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who contends that Internet companies should assume more responsibility for the content on their platforms. 

In the latest episode of HB Media Minute, Haynes Boone Partner Ryan Patrick discusses how businesses can use civil enforcement procedures to investigate whether their trademarks and copyrights have been infringed --  and, if they establish an infringement, how they can go about seizing counterfeit products. The former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Texas from 2018-2021, Patrick details the prevalence of counterfeiting, the significant costs it imposes on businesses, how civil investigations into counterfeiting are analogous to criminal investigations, the differences between grey market and black market good, and some of the methods businesses case use to police fake products and penalize counterfeiters.  

Haynes Boone Associate Michael Lambert appears on HB Media Minute to discuss the media's increasing use of drones in news coverage and how drone usage might be impacted by a recent federal court ruling that Texas' restrictive drone law is unconstitutional. Michael explained the Texas law at issue, which imposed civil and criminal penalties for the use of drones for certain purposes, such as to capture images of an individual or privately owned property with “the intent to conduct surveillance.” Michael analyzed why Texas federal judge Robert Pitman declared the law unconstitutional and how that ruling, which was issued in March 2022 and is currently on appeal, could provide Texas journalists great latitude to use drones. However the case is resolved, Michael explains, drone users still need to abide by federal laws and other regulations and other restrictions governing drone flights. 

In the latest HB Media Minute, Theresa Conduah, an Intellectual Property partner in Haynes Boone's Orange County office, discusses the complex state of the law governing influencer marketing of cannabis products. The podcast starts with a helpful  primer on the differences between such common terms as cannabis, CBD, Hemp, THC and cannabinoids; a survey of the current patchwork state of legality of cannabis and CBD products, and then an overview of do's and don'ts of using celebrities, athletes and social influencers to market cannabis products. 

Haynes Boone Associate Reid Pillifant, a former reporter whose legal practice focuses on media, IP, open government, anti-SLAPP and First Amendment litigation, reviews some of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson's previous rulings on FOIA, defamation and free speech issues and analyzes what they might portent about her approach to media law issues as a U.S. Supreme Court justice.  

In the latest edition of HB Media Minute, Haynes Boone Associate Michael Lambert revisits a topic explored in an earlier podcast: the First Amendment right to record police activity. Michael explores the issue in the wake of a recent ruling out of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in a case filed by an Austin man who was arrested for videotaping police activities. Michael discusses the civil rights lawsuit filed by the man and the police officer's defense of qualified immunity. He also previews a case where the U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether to allow First Amendment civil rights claims against federal government officials.

Partner Jason Bloom, Haynes Boone's head of Copyright Practice, and Associate Michael Lambert join moderator Nathan Koppel to discuss a new law that takes effect this spring and will allow a three-member tribunal within the U.S. Copyright Office to hear smaller-dollar copyright infringement claims. It's a significant development, since federal courts traditionally have had exclusive jurisdiction over copyrights infringement claims. We cover how the new forum -- called the Copyright Claims Board -- will work and some issues lawyers and parties should think about when deciding whether to litigate their cases in federal court or before the CCB.  

Haynes Boone intellectual property Associate Michael Lambert joins moderator Nathan Koppel to discuss recent developments impacting the public's right to view and access police operations and courtroom proceedings. We cover the impact of the George Floyd murder and COVID-19 on transparency and public access to governmental operations; police body cameras, and audio recording of U.S. Supreme Court hearings, among other topics. Michael Lambert is an associate in the Austin office of Haynes Boone. He focuses on media, entertainment, intellectual property, and First Amendment litigation. He also counsels clients on pre-publication review, privacy, access, and newsgathering matters.

Our returning guest today is Haynes Boone Associate Michael Lambert who is based in our Austin office and is a member of the firm's Intellectual Property Practice Group. Michael focuses on media, entertainment, IP, and First Amendment litigation. In this episode, we will complete our three-part discussion about Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which provides immunity (with some exceptions) to tech companies from liability for third-party content, such as reader posts, YouTube videos, and Instagram posts. As a reminder, in the first podcast on this topic, Michael discussed the history that led to the adoption of Section 230 and analyzed the key features of the law. In part two, he discussed an exception to the immunity provided by Section 230 – that is, the so-called Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act, or FOSTA , which allows claims against online services that allegedly facilitate sex trafficking. Today, Michael will discuss some of the controversy around Section 230 that has prompted calls to reform the law.  

We're joined again by Haynes Boone Associate Michael Lambert, who is based in our Austin office and is a member of the firm's Intellectual Property Practice Group. Michael focuses on media, entertainment, IP, and First Amendment litigation.In this episode, we will resume our discussion on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which provides immunity (with some exceptions) to tech companies from liability for third-party content, such as reader posts, YouTube videos, and Instagram posts. Today, we will focus on an exception that Congress, in 2018, added to Section 230 immunity. It's called FOSTA, which stands for the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act, and it allows claims to be brought against online service providers that allegedly facilitate trafficking. Michael will walk us through the history of FOSTA and its key provisions.Related episode: What is Section 230? (Part 1)

Today, we will talk about a hot topic – Section 230 of The Communications Decency Act, which is the legal framework that protects tech companies from liability for third-party content, such as reader posts, YouTube videos, and Instagram posts. It is a critical legal foundation for the expanding social media sphere. The law has plenty of supporters and detractors, including critics who say that service providers need to bear more responsibility to vet and police the content they host. Section 230 is such an interesting area of law that we are going to have two follow-up episodes that will delve deeper into related topics. We're joined by Haynes Boone Associate Michael Lambert who is based in our Austin office and is a member of the firm's Intellectual Property Practice Group. Michael focuses on media, entertainment, IP, and First Amendment litigation.

We're joined today by Haynes Boone Partner Lee Johnston who is based in our Denver office and has a national trial practice that includes patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secret litigation. In this episode, Lee will talk about data scraping, a growing and controversial practice that has been the subject of recent, high-profile litigation.

In this episode, we are joined by Haynes Boone Counsel Darwin Bruce, who will walk us through a checklist of key items for parties to consider when structuring transactions involving the entertainment industry. Darwin joined us earlier on the podcast to talk about the growth in streaming media. His practice focuses on media and entertainment transactions, corporate governance, mergers and acquisitions transactions, finance, and real estate transactions.

In this episode, we are joined by Haynes Boone Partner Laura Prather, who is the head of the Media Law Practice Group. Laura has been active in the legislative process in Texas for many years, advocating for landmark laws that strengthened First Amendment Rights in the state. She has spent a significant amount of time this year at the Texas capitol and will talk to us about some of the laws passed that impact First Amendment rights.

Today, we are going to talk about the U.S. Supreme Court's recent foray into copyright law, in the closely followed Google v. Oracle case from its prior term, and we will preview a case on the Court's 2021-2022 docket that will again delve into copyright law.We have two guides today: Partner Jason Bloom, a returning guest to the podcast, and Chair of the firm's Copyright Practice Group. Jason has litigated a wide variety of copyright disputes throughout the country. He is joined by Abbey Gauger, an associate in Haynes Boone's New York Office, who has handled a range of high-profile litigation in both federal and state courts in New York.

Today, we are covering an important topic: the impact the COVID-19 pandemic has had on governmental transparency, including open-records requests and public access to governmental meetings. As we'll discuss, the pandemic has been sort of a mixed bag, posing roadblocks to open government but also opening pathways to access public records, meetings and judicial proceedings. Joining us today is Partner Tom Williams, who has decades of experience handling cases and counseling clients on First Amendment issues, libel, invasion of privacy, open government and many other topics. Apropos of today's discussion, he recently wrote an article titled “Dichotomy in Transparency as a Result of COVID-19" for the 2020 - 2021 edition of the Haynes Boone Media and  Entertainment Law Year in Review.

Today, we are going to talk about some recent significant Texas Supreme Court rulings of particular interest to media companies. The rulings will have an impact on defamation cases and the Texas Citizens Participation Act, the state's anti-SLAPP law that establishes First Amendment protections for citizens to speak freely without fear of retaliatory suits.  We're joined by Haynes and Boone Partner Ben Mesches, who is Co-Chair of the firm's Litigation Practice Group and is a leading appellate lawyer in Texas. Ben has argued many major cases at the Texas Supreme Court and also previously clerked on the court. It'll be great to get his impressions on some the key recent decisions out of that court.

Today, we are going to talk about cybersquatting, which is the unauthorized registration of an Internet domain name, usually involving a well-known company or brand, with the bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill established by the actual trademark owners. Various legal tools have been created to help brand owners fight back against cybersquatting, but the practice nonetheless continues and has likely only increased. We will also explore the legal options available to brand owners to deal with this nuisance.   We're joined by an excellent guide, Haynes and Boone Trademark Partner Jeff Becker, who founded the firm's Trademark Practice and has grown it into one of the largest and most highly respected in the country, being ranked as National Gold, the top tier in World Trademark Review's WTR 1000 directory of leading trademarks practices.

Today's topic: talent releases and how to avoid liability for using a person's image in a creative work. Among other issues, we'll talk about the particular circumstances that require talent releases and the sorts of claims you can face if you are accused of the unauthorized use of a person's image.We are joined by Chrissy Long, an associate in Haynes and Boone's Fort Worth Office and a member of the firm's Media and Entertainment Litigation Practice Group. Chrissy has experience in a wide variety of litigation matters, on behalf of media and other corporate clients, and has written many articles touching on media and entertainment law and First Amendment topics. 

Today, we are going to explore copyright law and specifically the Fair Use doctrine. It's a legal principle designed to promote freedom of expression by permitting the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works in certain circumstances. Someone invoking the Fair Use defense has the burden of proving why it applies, and it can be hard to predict whether a court would conclude that a particular use of copyrighted material qualifies as Fair Use. We will also talk about two recent federal circuit decisions that highlight the fact-intensive manner in which courts analyze these issues. We're joined today by Haynes and Boone Partner Stephanie Sivinski. Stephanie focuses her practice on complex federal-court litigation and has won trial victories in high-stakes business and intellectual property disputes.

Today, we are going to explore the topic of data privacy, a vital issue that is in the news in some form or fashion every single day. We will cover a lot of fertile ground, including the General Data Protection Regulation (or GDPR), the strict European legal regime protecting European Citizens' personal data. We will also discuss the impact the GDPR has had on data privacy regulations in the U.S. and how European and U.S. data privacy rules impact media companies.  Haynes and Boone Partner Gavin George is joining the podcast to help us unpack this area of law. Gavin's practice covers privacy, data processing, technology transactions, and intellectual property in the information age, and he advises clients on the GDPR and California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which we will also discuss today. 

Today, we are going to explore legal issues surrounding a growing phenomenon in our society: offensive social media posts. We're going to discuss the issue in a particular context – the government workplace – and discuss when do public employees enjoy Free Speech rights to make comments that many would find offensive? Even if an employee's speech is protected by the First Amendment, can the employee still be fired or disciplined? There's a robust, evolving body of law that balances Free Speech rights with public employers' right to maintain workplace standards and efficient operations. We'll talk about the legal framework that courts have mapped and also look at a case involving a racist Facebook post by a Brooklyn court officer, which offers a recent, graphic example of how these issues can play out.We're joined by Haynes and Boone Partner Laura Prather, who is the head of the firm's Media Law Practice Group, and Alicia Pitts, an associate in Haynes and Boone's Litigation Practice.

We have a special, short episode today that will provide an update to a previous episode discussing a then-pending lawsuit between Taylor Swift and a theme park in Utah over the name “Evermore.” As luck would have it, right as we launched that episode, news broke out about a development in the case. We're joined again by Haynes and Boone lawyers Erin Hennessy and Annie Allison to discuss the case.

Today's topic: “What is a Standard Essential Patent and why do I need to know about them?” It's a legal issue that is at the root of many popular technologies.Our guide for today's discussion is Raghav Bajaj, an IP Partner in Haynes and Boone's Austin office. Raghav's practice focuses on patent office trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board including inter partes review and covered business method review proceedings, representing both petitioners and patent owners. He has served as counsel in more than 50 patent office trials.

Today, we're going to talk about some of the tricky issues entertainment companies face when it comes to making sure that the titles of their TV shows, films, songs, or other expressive works do not infringe on protected trademarks. We are going to discuss the topic in the context of a pending suit between Taylor Swift and Evermore Park in Utah. We'll also discuss how the First Amendment impacts trademark rights in titles, among other issues.We're joined by two lawyers from Haynes and Boone's New York office: Partner Erin Hennessy, who focuses her practice on trademark, copyright, internet and social media issues spanning many industries including media, publishing, technology, retail, fashion and financial services. Erin currently serves as Counsel to the International Trademark Association (INTA) Board of Directors. We are also joined by Associate Annie Allison, who handles a broad range of intellectual property matters, including trademark prosecution, copyright clearance and registration, rights enforcement strategies, brand management and licensing for media, entertainment, fashion and technology companies.

We are going to delve into a topic that we discussed briefly in our last podcast: streaming media. It's a growing market fueled by a seemingly unquenchable thirst for on-demand video and audio programming. But the growing universe of content has created a growing challenge for media companies and other content providers and consumers to make sure they are protecting their own IP and are not infringing others' copyrights and trademarks. Haynes and Boone Counsel, Darwin Bruce, will offer suggestions and legal issues for listeners to consider amid the explosion in streaming media. Darwin's practice focuses on media and entertainment transactions, corporate governance, mergers and acquisitions transactions, finance, and real estate transactions.

Today, we are going to talk about  the Trademark Modernization Act, a major piece of legislation that was signed into law late last year. The trademark law might have been easy to overlook since it was tucked inside the 5,500-plus COVID-19 relief bill. Our guests today have unearthed the Trademark Modernization Act and will walk us through some of the significant changes it makes to both trademark and copyright law: Joe Matal, a Washington, D.C. partner in Haynes and Boone's IP Practice, who previously served as acting director and acting solicitor of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Joe has called the law we're discussing today the most significant piece of trademark legislation in the last 75 years and will tell us why. 

We have a great topic today: social influencers. They exercise growing cultural stature and marketing muscle in our society, but their influence campaigns occasionally bump up against advertising regulations. We will explore some of the rules designed to restrict how influencers go about touting brands, and discuss some issues that have arisen with the popular platform TikTok.Joseph Lawlor, a lawyer in Haynes and Boone's New York office, will guide today's discussion. Joe litigates high-stakes intellectual property, advertising, branding, media and First Amendment disputes. Joe frequently appears before the federal National Advertising Division, representing both advertisers and those challenging ads.

The number of people creating content online continues to grow worldwide, whether through traditional websites and news sites, social media sites like Facebook or Instagram, via blogs, YouTube videos, or many other platforms. This, in turn, has led to a rising tide of copyright disputes. Anytime you use someone else's image, video, music or text online, there is a risk that you are infringing someone's intellectual property. Today, Haynes and Boone Partner Jason Bloom is joining the podcast to discuss the scope of copyright protection that exists for online materials, the types of disputes that have arisen in this area, how to avoid liability, and what to do if you're on the receiving end of a complaint. Jason chairs the firm's Copyright Practice Group and has litigated a wide variety of copyright disputes throughout the country.

A podcast series focused on new legal developments and trends impacting the media and entertainment industry, intellectual property, and open government and First Amendment law.Today's discussion focuses on the impact of COVID-19 on government transparency - in particular, the public's ability to fully access public meetings and open records. Moderated by Nathan Koppel, Director of Media Relations at Haynes and Boone, Nathan is joined by Haynes and Boone Partner Thomas Williams, who has decades of experience handling cases involving First Amendment issues and claims of libel, invasion of privacy and many other issues.

A podcast focused on new legal developments and trends impacting the media and entertainment industry, intellectual property, and open government and First Amendment law.Today's discussion will focus on a hot topic - the legal framework that protects tech companies from liability for third-party content, such as reader posts, YouTube videos, and Instagram posts. Moderated by Nathan Koppel, Director of Media Relations at Haynes and Boone, Nathan is joined by Haynes and Boone Associate Wesley Lewis.

A podcast focused on new legal developments and trends impacting the media and entertainment industry, intellectual property, and open government and First Amendment law. Our topic today is an update on some key developments nationwide with anti-SLAPP legislation and litigation. Moderated by Nathan Koppel, Director of Media Relations at Haynes and Boone, Nathan is joined by Haynes and Boone Partner Laura Prather, Chair of our Media and Entertainment Law Practice Group. Laura recently received The American Lawyer's Tony Mauro Media Lawyer Award in recognition of tireless and successful efforts advocating for legislation to strengthen First Amendment rights in Texas. George Freeman, executive director of the Media Law Resource Center, nominated Prather for the award, saying she “has changed the legal landscape for free speech rights in Texas.” Laura is always so interesting to listen to. Enjoy this podcast!