HHR New Media, Entertainment and Technology Group

The next interactive gaming revolution will soon be ushered in by a wave of gesture detection control systems, where the player’s body controls the action.  Beginning this year, game developers and publishers will have the technology to develop a viable motion capture-based game, one with more potential applications than any gaming console or system released to date.  Using a TV-mounted motion detection camera and a handheld controller, the PlayStation Motion Controller (rumored to be named the “Arc”) will be capable of recognizing and tracking a user’s face and voice as well as body motion.  Similarly, Microsoft’s Project Natal system for the Xbox 360 will use a TV-mounted motion detection camera that will track the movement of every part of the body, and capture, for the first time, a three-dimensional representation of the player on the screen completely sans gaming controllers. Now, as consumers await the release of a slew of motion capture games scheduled for retail this holiday season, publishers and developers alike need to brace themselves for the myriad of potential legal issues concerning the ownership and licensing of the movements replicated and featured in those games. Continue Reading »

Joint ownership of copyrights is a tricky issue in any transaction.  It is one confronted regularly in digital media deals where rights in the underlying content are often owned by more than one person and licenses are granted retroactively.  Recent decisions in the Second and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals have caused tremendous concern about the eroding rights of copyright co-owners.  In Davis v. Blige, the Second Circuit held that copyright co-owners cannot unilaterally issue retroactive licenses.  And in Sybersound v. UAV Corp., , the Ninth Circuit held that a copyright co-owner cannot grant an exclusive license without the consent of all the other co-owners.  The combined effect of these decisions has been described as the “death of divisibility” in copyright law.  These decisions threaten to pose considerable difficulties for anyone looking to acquire rights in a copyright that is owned by more than one individual.     Continue Reading »

Cablevision can move forward with its plans to move its digital video recording service into the cloud, thanks to the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the broadcast industry’s appeal of a decision granting summary judgment in favor of Cablevision.

While consumer DVRs have been used for years, Cablevision sought to launch a service for the remote storage of shows recorded by consumers.  Cablevision’s argument in favor of such service was that, as long as consumers were still in control of the recording, playback and deletion process, the location of the hard drive on which the content was stored didn’t matter.  Broadcasters disagreed, however, claiming that by archiving and retransmitting the content, Cablevision was engaging in copyright infringement. Continue Reading »

Click here to subscribe to digitalhhr.

• The Performance Rights Act, which was approved by the House Judiciary Committee on May 13th, would levy fees on broadcasters for airing artists’ recordings. An indication of the heat generated by the debate over the PRA emerged this week when the musicFIRST Coalition, however, filed a complaint asking the FCC to investigate whether radio stations have been boycotting artists that support the PRA. The coalition’s filing accuses broadcasters of airing deceptive spots by portraying the proposed royalty as a “tax” and not airing musicFIRST’s own paid ad endorsements. While musicFIRST did not identify any specific station or broadcaster withholding airplay, the coalition alleged that several stations have refused to play an artist’s music based on his or her remarks or affiliation with endorsing the legislation. Spokesman Marty Machowsky said it would only identify specifics if the FCC initiates the proceeding and agrees to keep the information confidential. Continue Reading »

If you are designing or developing a video game that depicts this planet or any other fictional world, then you need a pair of trained legal eyes to review the people, places, products and things that will be featured in the game. Go it alone, and you are traveling down a windy road that intersects with copyright, trademark, privacy law and the First Amendment, where the case law is complex, the rulings are inconsistent, and the outcome may ultimately depend on the jurisdiction. Make one mistake and you will find yourself staring down a lawsuit before your game title moves a thousand copies. Whether the lawsuit is filed by the owner of a popular destination who thinks you stole the “look and feel” of his establishment (see E.S.S. Entertainment 2000, Inc. v. Rock Star Videos, Inc., 2008 WL 4791705 (9th Cir. 2008)) or the lead singer of a retro-funk dance group who claims a character in your game wears the same clothing and resembles her (see Kirby v. Sega of America, Inc., 144 Cal.App.4th 47 (2006)), video game profits have caught the world’s attention, and, as in all things, success leads to lawsuits. Continue Reading »