Mr. Grant has a rock solid case. Tangerine used it without asking, and got some 23 million views in under a few weeks, in 2020-21. Under local rules, since the able USDC Judge ruled in September 2021 that Baby-T. must stand trial, Tangerine's legal team was required to attend a judicially-governed settlement conference, to see if this could be resolved without a costly trial (largely by the payment of damages -- by him).
That occurred on this past Wednesday. And while no published report of the outcome was made, and the session was not on an open Zoom feed, we may safely infer that (as ever) Tangerine is refusing to pay his lawful debts. . . here.
His claim (such as it is) is that this was political speech, and protected. The applicable law actually answers. . . that artists may fairly control the market for their art. And any given political ad's author doesn't (without more) have the right to foreclose that artistic property right. [Mr. Grant was seeking no office himself, obviously -- so it cannot be said the ad was a comment upon him or his politics. And the ad didn't even bother to rewrite the lyrics to the song -- it just. . . stole them.]
And so, this artist quite understandably wants nothing to do with Tangerine. [Don Henley ("Boys of Summer") won a similar federal copyright suit against a GOP campaign, back 2010.]
So T. will ultimately lose. And Mr. Grant will get both an injunction against any future use, and a check for substantial damages. But we all know T. will drag it out, for as long as he can -- or until he runs out of cash. Ugh -- what a tool.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment