The Anchor Plate : Intellectual Property Lawyers & Attorneys : BrickHouse Law Group : Open-Price Lawyering, Hourly Billing : St. Louis, Missouri

Michael Kahn and Geoffrey Gerber, the principals at the law firm formerly known as The BrickHouse Law Group, announced today that the firm has changed its name to Kahn Gerber Professional Corporation.

Founded in 2009, the law firm has focused on the representation of creators and users of intellectual property (including copyrights and trademarks), primarily in the fields of entertainment, publishing, media, music, advertisement, and the like.

"As we increase our emphasis on ligation and trials in various venues," Gerber explained, "we felt it important to included the names of the firm's principals in the name of the firm. The way the firm's name reflects the courtroom experiences of its attorney."

"My only regret," added Kahn, "is the memory of one federal judge who, upon hearing the name of our law firm, broke into an a cappella version of the Commodore's "Brickhouse." I don't think we can expect the same reaction to the new name.

Recently, one of the firm's founders, Pete Salsich, left the firm to become general counsel of one of the firm's entertainment clients, the St. Louis-based Coolfire Companies.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

As many of you know, the authors of AnchorPlate are musically inclined, and I’d like to include myself in that estimation. I don’t play guitar like Pete, or the harmonica like Mike, but I can rap along with most Young Money hits, as well as the entirety of Nelly’s catalogue. So of course I had to write a post regarding this fascinating suit filed by an ex-drug lord from the ‘80s, “Freeway” Ricky Ross, whose name was apparently the inspiration for William Leonard Roberts II (Rick Ross a.k.a. Ricky Rozay), a popular MC.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The folly of the billable hour has been the subject of several posts on this blog, including this one by Pete more than three years ago. As former partners at major law firms where the billable hour rules supreme, one of our goals at the BrickHouse has been to encourage our clients to consider alternative fee arrangements that are based on value instead of billable hours.

Now a new powerful voice has joined the chorus.The recent uproar over the billing scandal at DLA Piper law firm inspired an excellent essay in today's New York Times entitled "The Tyranny of the Billable Hour." In that piece, Steven Harper, a former partner at the international law firm of Kirkland & Ellis, makes a compelling case against the law firm billable hour.

Which brings me to the passenger pigeon.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Two weeks ago, the excited tittering about crowdfunding hit a level comparable to the shrieking begat by The Beatles’ concerts at Shea Stadium. Three season cult-TV darling, “Veronica Mars,” broke all sorts of Kickstarter records when it raised over $2 million in its first twelve hours on the site.

For those of you unfamiliar with Kickstarter, it is a popular crowdfunding platform where entrepreneurial folks –  from a few St. Louisans trying to open up a gourmand donut shop (thank you, Donut Gods!) to the  filmmakers behind this year’s Oscar-winning documentary short, “Inocente” – can post a fundraising goal they hope to achieve within 30 days, and then receive pledges from backers to meet that goal. The “Veronica Mars” Kickstarter, as with many others, offers certain incentives depending on the pledge level, such as a copy of the movie, and other like “Veronica Mars” swag (similar to the NPR pledge week, which thankfully has ended for this season, and won’t prevent me from listening to “Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me” this Saturday).

Whether or not the “Veronica Mars” equivalent of an unidentifiable plant potted in an “I Heart NPR” coffee mug was an incentive for fans to pledge, pledge they did.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Following up on my recent post on the story, I had the opportunity to speak with Colin O'Keefe of LXBN regarding the New York Yankees earning the exclusive right to be referred to as baseball's "evil empire." In the brief interview I explain how the trademark came about even though the Yankees have never even actually used it themselves. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In an earlier post on the RALLY SQUIRREL trademark issues, I explored the realm of flattering sports team trademarks that were coined by the media or the team's fans but then adopted--and co opted--by the team itself. A good example is DREAM TEAM, originally the title of a 1991 Sports Illustrated cover story on the USA Men's Olympic Basketball Team that featured Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson and Patrick Ewing.

DREAM TEAM? Sure, who wouldn't love that trademark for their team? But EVIL EMPIRE? Only in New York.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

During the heated election season last fall, about the only thing the GOP had in common with gay marriage was the letter "G." That disconnect is at the core of a brilliant national advertising campaign launched last week by the Respect for Marriage Coalition. Their campaign features a television commercial, "Leadership," that includes gay marriage endorsements by three Republican icons--Laura Bush, Dick Cheney and General Colin Powell--all taken from their prior TV interviews or speeches.

Now come reports that Mrs. Bush wants herself removed from that commercial. According to the Bush family spokeswoman Anne MacDonald, the former first lady “did not approve of her inclusion in this advertisement nor is she associated with the group that made the ad in any way.”

While the Coalition, bowing to public relations and political imperatives, announced that it will remove her from the commercial, the more interesting question is whether the Coalition has any legal obligation to do so. Specifically, does Mrs. Bush have a viable claim that use of her identity in a paid commercial violates her right of publicity?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

My last post described the wacky breach-of-contract lawsuit Donald Trump filed against comedian Bill Maher last week.

The basis of the lawsuit was Maher's alleged failure to live up to an "unconditional offer" made last month on NBC's Tonight Show to donate $5 million to charity if Trump provided a copy of his birth certificate proving that he’s not “spawn of his mother having sex with orangutan."  Trump provided a birth certificate, demanded the money, Maher shrugged, and Trump sued.

Donning what I believed was my impressive First Amendment suit of armor, I explained why Maher's lawyers might seek dismissal of the lawsuit on free speech grounds via an anti-SLAPP motion.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

For my fellow media lawyers, Donald Trump is our version of the Jelly of the Month Club in National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation. He is, to borrow the immortal words of Cousin Eddie (Randy Quaid), "the  gift that keeps on giving the whole year."

Our blog colleagues at The Hollywood Reporter have posted a fascinating analysis of this month's gift: a $5 million breach-of-contract lawsuit against comedian Bill Maher. Trump's claim is based on Maher's alleged failure to live up to an "unconditional offer" made last month on NBC's Tonight Show to donate $5 million to charity if Trump provided a copy of his birth certificate proving that he’s not “spawn of his mother having sex with orangutan.”

"I'm not saying it's true," Maher told Jay Leno. "I hope it's not true, but unless he comes up with proof ... I'm willing to offer $5 million to Donald Trump that he can donate to a charity of his choice -- Hair Club for Men; The Institute for Incorrigible Douche-bag-ery. Whatever charity." As Maher pointed out, to laughter from the audience, the color of Mr. Trump's hair "and the color of an orange orangutan [are]the only two things in nature of the same color.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

By the time the St. Louis Cardinals reached the 2011 World Series, the little gray squirrel that had dashed across home plate during Skip Schumaker's at-bat early in the playoffs had been transformed into The Rally Squirrel. And by the time Alan Craig caught the final out in the 9th inning of Game 7, the first application to register RALLY SQUIRREL was on file with the U.S. Trademark Office.

As I pointed out more than a year ago in my first post on this subject, the applicant--PBR Industries--is not affiliated with the Cardinals or Major League Baseball. Although the focus of that post was whether someone should be able to claim trademark rights in a name that originated in the public domain, I ended it: "But the drama should become particularly interesting if and when the 500-pound gorilla known as MLB Properties decides to enter stage left."

Guess who just entered stage left?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

During this holiday season, those of us who practice intellectual property law need to remember to count our blessings, and surely one of them is Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, a source of special gifts throughout the year.

The latest delightful present arrived less than a week before Christmas.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Albert Einstein once said, "The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once."

But a California federal district court has taught Einstein's heirs another reason for time: the statute of limitations. It was an expensive lesson, worth $10 million in 2012 alone.

The image at issue (shown to the left) was used by General Motors in a print ad for its GMC Terrain SUV. The plaintiff, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (as a beneficiary of Einstein's will), argued that GM used the image without authorization in violation of Einstein's right of publicity.

The court rejected the claim, ruling that GM didn't need consent to use Einstein's image because it had been too long since Einstein's death for anyone to limit the use of his likeness

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Why are so many legal thrillers written by lawyers? As one such lawyer who sues by day and writes by night, here is my answer, as published in the current issue of Mystery Readers Journal, a publication of Mystery Readers International.

The quote in the first paragraph of my essay is from the opening lines of my short story, "The Bread of Affliction." I guarantee that every trial lawyer can relate to those opening lines.

Enjoy!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Photo: "Yoga in the Mountains" by Tomas Sobek licensed under Creative Common Attribution License.

Until recently, the U.S. Copyright Office took the position that the selection and ordering of public domain exercises was copyrightable. But the Office has now revoked the position, explaining in a new statement of policy that a compilation of exercises or the selection and arrangement of yoga poses would be refused registration because exercise is not a category of authorship that can be granted copyright protection. This new opinion arose out of a copyright case pitting “Bikram Yoga” against “Yoga to the People.”

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link