I’m currently enrolled in an Entertainment Law class through Full Sail University where we’re delving into the very common, yet very unfortunate issues of legal problems in the entertainment world. I’m currently working on a business plan for a reality television production company that produces family-friendly reality shows while also highlighting major global social issues. As I’m researching the field, I’m finding that it’s very critical to know copyright laws when diving into this territory.
This post will take a look at three recent issues regarding reality television and legal trouble. It surprised me, in a way, that I didn’t have to look very long to find some pretty major cases taking place that as I read through them, seems they could have been prevented had the parties involved done a little research, or done simple things such as writing out an actual contract. It amazes me what heartache can be avoided by simply covering all your bases before even making a move on a project.
The first article I read was, “$4 million verdict against A&E Television affirmed in favor of ‘Flip This House’ creator” written by Hank Fasthoof. It’s about a recent decision from the courts to award Richard Davis $4 million from A&E for his wildly popular reality show “Flip This House”. Davis claims that as he and A&E executive Charles Norlander negotiated a deal for A&E to take on Davis’ idea, A&E would split the profits 50/50 with Davis; the main problem here being, there was no written contract spelling out these agreements. Davis took A&E took court after the show filmed a pilot and 13 episodes and saw no money, says Fasthoof in the court case summary. The major dispute that erupted was due to the fact the Norlander and Davis never wrote down their agreements in writing. Much of their “agreement” was somewhat wishy-washy. Through it all, a jury in an appeals court did indeed side with Davis saying that Norlander, though he never came out and directly said that A&E agreed with the 50/50 revenue split, his comment, “Okay, Okay, I get it, I get”, during their initial deliberations was a sufficient verbal contract legally binding A&E to their of the 50/50 bargain, therefore landing Davis with a $4 million paycheck. Not bad for never putting in writing.
What I see from this case is a very unfortunate example of how important a mutually accepted written contract can be. Though it did end up working out for Davis in the end, much time, money and probably professional relationships could have been saved if the two had just been proactive enough to be adults, sit down and hash out both sides of their expectations by writing out a legally binding contract so there was absolutely no question of who expected what. Unfortunately that was not the case, and it cost A&E a HUGE chunk of change they were not expecting to part with, and I imagine some big red flags to be raised by both parties in how to execute further deals. It goes to show, no one is immune to legal trouble.
Another recent case I found is what you could say is indirectly related to reality television. Back in September of 2010, Paris Hilton, star of hit reality show “The Simple Life” was awarded a major undisclosed settlement from Hallmark when they used her coined phrase “That’s hot”, made popular by her role in “The Simple Life”, with then best friend, Nicole Richie. Hallmark made a bad choice to use her jargon in a greeting card line back in 2007, which caused Hilton and legal team to jump on the legal wagon to prove a publicity rights infringement. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals eventually sided with Hilton saying that her phrase was indeed infringed upon, and that Hallmark could not claim First Amendment rights on this one. In my opinion, Hallmark needs to back up off Hilton…they’re just jealous they didn’t think of that phrase themselves. :-) In all honesty I did find this article very intriguing. While the judgment doesn’t necessarily surprise me, after all, I’m pretty sure Paris’ legal team will only pounce when they have significant proof that they will succeed, I am slightly surprised that Hallmark was not aware of the dangers of publicity rights infringement…who do they think they are…Paris Hilton? ;-)
And last, but certainly not least, the above link is a recent case surrounding the wildly popular NBC reality show, “The Biggest Loser”. If there’s one thing I have been learning about court cases related to reality television it’s the terms “substantial similarities” and “scenes a faire”. The former is what the courts will judge a copyright infringement case against, in this case, “Phat Farm/Fat Pharm” vs. The Biggest Loser. The creator of “Phat Farm” accused NBC’s “The Biggest Loser” of stealing their concept for a weight loss show. To make a long story short, in the end the court threw out the case before trial stating that there were no substantial similarities between the shows and that the concepts were protected as “scenes a faire”, meaning they concepts are so common that they are not protectable. According the article, courts will ask three main questions in these copyright cases: 1. Is there an official Library of Congress Registration? 2. Was there access to the material claiming to be infringed upon? 3. With the independent creation and the creative expression found within, is there any substantial similarity within the element of that creative expression? In this case, there was no evidence pointing to the fact that NBC had infringed in any way upon “Phat Farm’s” concept.
I’m learning that it’s pretty much a race to get your idea out there first. The chances of you being the ONLY person with your particular concept is fairly slim, and whoever gets to the finish line first will have a serious advantage. I’m also amazed that people don’t do their homework in knowing the law and understanding just what constitutes illegal copyright infringement and what does not. From what I have seen in the reality television sector, unless someone comes out with a show that is almost identical to an existing one, one is not going to have a shot in the courtroom with claiming copyright infringement. It’s seems all is fair in love and reality television…well, almost...
Please leave your comments, opinions or questions below. Would love to hear your thoughts on these issues. Thanks for reading!
