Sports & Entertainment Law News

Case Summaries

Entertainment

Read More

Sports Law

[09/02] Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens Ltd, P'Ship
In plaintiff's copyright infringement suit against the Baltimore Ravens football organization and National Football League entities for their unauthorized copying of a Ravens team logo, drawn by plaintiff, that was used for three seasons as the team's official symbol, district court's determination that defendants' depictions of the logo in season highlight films and in the Ravens corporate lobby were fair use, in entering judgment against the plaintiff is reversed in part, affirmed in part and remanded where: 1) because defendants cannot establish a fair use defense for the depictions of the logo in the highlight films, where the logo use is nontransformative and commercial, district court's judgment on this matter is reversed; 2) defendants' claim that plaintiff's request for injunctive relief against these acts of infringement is precluded is rejected and on remand, district court is directed to consider whether an injunction is appropriate; and 3) district court's finding of fair use as to the depictions of the logo in the Ravens corporate lobby, where team history is portrayed, free of charge, is affirmed.

[08/16] Adams v. Del. Harness Racing Comm'n
In an appeal from an order of the Delaware Harness Racing Commission claiming that it improperly sanctioned a horse trainer after his horses tested positive for a prohibited drug, the order is affirmed where: 1) the Commission did not deprive petitioner of a fair and impartial hearing; and 2) the Commission was lenient with petitioner because it treated all three offenses as first offenses and imposed the minimum penalties.

[07/23] Race Tires Am., Inc. v. Hoosier Racing Tire Corp.
In plaintiff's antitrust suit against a tire supplier competitor and a motorsports sanctioning body, arising from the adoption of the so-called "single tire rule" by various sanctioning bodies in the sport of dirt oval track racing as well as the exclusive supply contracts between the sanctioning bodies and the defendant tire supplier, district court's grant of defendants' motions for summary judgment is affirmed where: 1) a general rule is adopted that the Sherman Act does not forbid sanctioning bodies and other sport-related organizations from freely adopting exclusive equipment requirements, so long as such organizations otherwise possess, in good faith, sufficient pro-competitive or business justifications for their actions; 2) the district court was correct to grant summary judgment in favor of the defendants because of plaintiffs' failure to meet the antitrust injury requirement; and 3) the district court did not abuse its discretion on rejecting a last minute attempt to amend a pleading for the fourth time.

[07/22] US v. Thomas
Cyclist Tammy Thomas's convictions for three counts of perjury and one count of obstruction of justice are affirmed where: 1) the jury could reasonably have concluded from all this testimony that defendant's grand jury testimony that she never received any "other products" was not literally true; 2) a reasonable jury could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant understood the question in count three of the indictment as the government understood it and that she answered falsely based on this understanding; and 3) there was sufficient evidence for the jury reasonably to conclude that defendant did not offer literally true answers in the exchange charged in count four of the indictment.

Read More