MEMORANDUM

TO:            Junior Associates, RWA Section 16
FROM:          Senior Partner Goering and Senior Associate Malony
RE:            No Doubt v. Activision Publishing, Inc.
DATE:          November 3, 2010

        Our firm has been retained by Activision Publishing, Inc., a successful producer and
distributor of video games, to assist in defending a complaint filed by No Doubt,a group of
musical performers. The band filed a lawsuitin the Los Angeles Superior Court alleging
several counts against our client. However, the only one we are concerned with is the second
cause of action alleging violation of California Civil Code § 3344 and the common law right
of publicity. Do not research any other claims.
        Shortly after No Doubt filed its complaint in Los Angeles County Superior Court,
defendant Activision Publishing, Inc. removed the case to federal court, invoking 28 U.S.C. §
1446.Activision argued that the U.S. Copyright Act preempted No Doubt’s state law claims,
and for that reason invoked the federal court’s exclusive jurisdiction to consider federal
copyright claims. However, the federal court rejected Activision’s argument and remanded
the case to state court in an order dated January 14, 2010.While the case was still pending in
federal court, Activision filed an answer and counterclaim against No Doubt. In turn, No
Doubt filed an answer to Activision’s counterclaim.
        After considering the parties’ arguments, the federal court issued an order remanding
the case to state court, holding that the Copyright Act did not preempt the state law claims.
That order is not at issue at this time. However, Activision’s Notice of Removal, the federal
court’s Order to Show Cause, and the Order Remanding to State Court are included for the
record so you understand why some of the pleadings were filed in federal court.
       The case is now proceeding in the Los Angeles Superior Court of the State of
California, and that court will make any further decisions in the case, subject to appeal to the
California appellate courts. The primary documents you need to review are the Complaint,
the Answer and Counterclaim, and the Answer to Counterclaim. You can sort out the facts
from those documents, but be sure to carefully note that some facts are undisputed or
“admitted,” while others are hotly disputed.
       The relevant documents are posted on the TWEN website in a separate folder titled
“Open Memo No. 3” under the “Writing Assignments” tab. Please download and carefully
review those documents before proceeding with the assignment.
        Based upon the facts alleged in the pleadings, please analyzethe following questions
in a formal office memo:
        1.   Are No Doubt’s claims for violation of the statutory and common law rights of
             publicity barred by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution or by Article
             1, § 2 of the California Constitution?
2.   Are No Doubt’s claimsfor violation of the statutory and common law rights of
            publicity barred by the Professional Services and Character License Agreement
            dated May 21, 2009?
       Your memo should include a heading similar to the heading of this memo. Use 12-
point Times New Roman font and one-inch margins. Except for the heading, please double-
space your memo and number the pages, centered at the bottom of each page. Please do not
exceed ten double-spaced pages. (If longer, I will read only the first ten pages.)
       You may discuss the assignment and the legal authorities with other first-year
students in Professor Goering’s RWA Sections (13 or 16). You may also discuss the
assignment with Victoria Malony during her office hours or by appointment. Do not discuss
the assignment with anyone else, including your other professors, roommates, parents,
siblings, relatives, friends, acquaintances, or strangers. Finally, your writing must be
exclusively yours. You may not show your written work to anyone except Victoria Malony
or me. Victoria is not authorized to edit or revise your written work, which must be
exclusively your own. You are expected to do your best work on your memo, which is
equivalent to the final exam in this course.Your memo is due Tuesday, November 23,
2010, no later than 5:00 p.m.




                                           2

More Related Content

DOC
Spring 2007 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. belfast (prosecutor)
DOC
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac lanham act trademar...
DOC
Spring 2007 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. belfast (prosecution)
DOC
Spring 2007 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. belfast (public defender's off...
DOC
Fall 2007 closed memo assignment a m - laura jade coton v. tvx, inc. appropri...
PDF
Fall 2009 closed memo assignment no. 1 lara jade coton misappropriation of ...
PPTX
LA3100 Week 1 Lecture
DOC
Fall 2007 closed memo assignment n z - laura jade coton v. tvx, inc. appropri...
Spring 2007 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. belfast (prosecutor)
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac lanham act trademar...
Spring 2007 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. belfast (prosecution)
Spring 2007 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. belfast (public defender's off...
Fall 2007 closed memo assignment a m - laura jade coton v. tvx, inc. appropri...
Fall 2009 closed memo assignment no. 1 lara jade coton misappropriation of ...
LA3100 Week 1 Lecture
Fall 2007 closed memo assignment n z - laura jade coton v. tvx, inc. appropri...

Similar to Fall 2010 open memo assignment no doubt v. activision right of publicity california section 16 (20)

DOC
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac lanham act trademar...
DOC
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac lanham act trademar...
DOC
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac lanham act trademar...
DOC
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac lanham act trademar...
DOCX
Fall 2011 closed memo no. 2 assignment cooper v. stockett appropriation of ...
DOCX
Fall 2011 closed memo no. 2 assignment cooper v. stockett appropriation of ...
DOCX
Fall 2010 closed memo no. 1 assignment cooper v. stockett - invasion of pri...
DOCX
Fall 2011 closed memo no. 1 assignment cooper v. stockett - right of privac...
DOC
Spring 2007 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. belfast (public defender's off...
DOC
Spring 2007 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. belfast (prosecution)
PDF
Various letters set1.pdf
DOCX
Graded ProjectLegal WritingProject 2ByMike Wilson,.docx
DOCX
IST 309 Team-ProjectA. Write about laws of Drones. (Like Privacy.docx
DOCX
For each scenario listed below, answer these questions. Reminder to .docx
DOC
Spring 2009 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. apollo energies (prosecution)
DOC
Spring 2009 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. apollo energies (defendants)
PPTX
How to Brief a Legal Case
DOCX
homew.docx
PDF
Various letters set3.pdf
DOCX
MBA535 Case Brief Guidelines and Rubric How and Why to Brie.docx
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac lanham act trademar...
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac lanham act trademar...
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac lanham act trademar...
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac lanham act trademar...
Fall 2011 closed memo no. 2 assignment cooper v. stockett appropriation of ...
Fall 2011 closed memo no. 2 assignment cooper v. stockett appropriation of ...
Fall 2010 closed memo no. 1 assignment cooper v. stockett - invasion of pri...
Fall 2011 closed memo no. 1 assignment cooper v. stockett - right of privac...
Spring 2007 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. belfast (public defender's off...
Spring 2007 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. belfast (prosecution)
Various letters set1.pdf
Graded ProjectLegal WritingProject 2ByMike Wilson,.docx
IST 309 Team-ProjectA. Write about laws of Drones. (Like Privacy.docx
For each scenario listed below, answer these questions. Reminder to .docx
Spring 2009 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. apollo energies (prosecution)
Spring 2009 appellate brief assignment u.s. v. apollo energies (defendants)
How to Brief a Legal Case
homew.docx
Various letters set3.pdf
MBA535 Case Brief Guidelines and Rubric How and Why to Brie.docx
Ad

More from Lyn Goering (15)

PDF
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac complaint pdf
DOCX
Spring 2010 closed memo jellyvision v. aflac trademark infringement researc...
DOCX
Spring 2010 closed memo jellyvision v. aflac trademark infringement researc...
PDF
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac complaint pdf
DOC
Spring 2006 appellate brief assignment west v. mercy hospital (defendant)
DOC
Spring 2006 appellate brief assignment west v. mercy hospital (plaintiff)
DOC
Spring 2006 appellate brief assignment west v. mercy hospital - timeline of...
DOC
Spring 2006 appellate brief assignment west v. mercy hospital - appendix
DOC
Fall 2006 closed memo assignment workers' comp. horseplay rule a z doc
DOC
Case brief assignment costanza v seinfeld
DOCX
Spring 2010 closed memo jellyvision v. aflac trademark infringement researc...
PDF
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac complaint pdf
PDF
Fall 2010 open memo assignment no doubt v. activision right of publicity cali...
PDF
Fall 2010 open memo assignment no doubt v. activision right of publicity cali...
PDF
Fall 2010 open memo assignment no doubt v. activision right of publicity cali...
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac complaint pdf
Spring 2010 closed memo jellyvision v. aflac trademark infringement researc...
Spring 2010 closed memo jellyvision v. aflac trademark infringement researc...
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac complaint pdf
Spring 2006 appellate brief assignment west v. mercy hospital (defendant)
Spring 2006 appellate brief assignment west v. mercy hospital (plaintiff)
Spring 2006 appellate brief assignment west v. mercy hospital - timeline of...
Spring 2006 appellate brief assignment west v. mercy hospital - appendix
Fall 2006 closed memo assignment workers' comp. horseplay rule a z doc
Case brief assignment costanza v seinfeld
Spring 2010 closed memo jellyvision v. aflac trademark infringement researc...
Spring 2010 closed memo assignment jellyvision v. aflac complaint pdf
Fall 2010 open memo assignment no doubt v. activision right of publicity cali...
Fall 2010 open memo assignment no doubt v. activision right of publicity cali...
Fall 2010 open memo assignment no doubt v. activision right of publicity cali...
Ad

Fall 2010 open memo assignment no doubt v. activision right of publicity california section 16

  • 1. MEMORANDUM TO: Junior Associates, RWA Section 16 FROM: Senior Partner Goering and Senior Associate Malony RE: No Doubt v. Activision Publishing, Inc. DATE: November 3, 2010 Our firm has been retained by Activision Publishing, Inc., a successful producer and distributor of video games, to assist in defending a complaint filed by No Doubt,a group of musical performers. The band filed a lawsuitin the Los Angeles Superior Court alleging several counts against our client. However, the only one we are concerned with is the second cause of action alleging violation of California Civil Code § 3344 and the common law right of publicity. Do not research any other claims. Shortly after No Doubt filed its complaint in Los Angeles County Superior Court, defendant Activision Publishing, Inc. removed the case to federal court, invoking 28 U.S.C. § 1446.Activision argued that the U.S. Copyright Act preempted No Doubt’s state law claims, and for that reason invoked the federal court’s exclusive jurisdiction to consider federal copyright claims. However, the federal court rejected Activision’s argument and remanded the case to state court in an order dated January 14, 2010.While the case was still pending in federal court, Activision filed an answer and counterclaim against No Doubt. In turn, No Doubt filed an answer to Activision’s counterclaim. After considering the parties’ arguments, the federal court issued an order remanding the case to state court, holding that the Copyright Act did not preempt the state law claims. That order is not at issue at this time. However, Activision’s Notice of Removal, the federal court’s Order to Show Cause, and the Order Remanding to State Court are included for the record so you understand why some of the pleadings were filed in federal court. The case is now proceeding in the Los Angeles Superior Court of the State of California, and that court will make any further decisions in the case, subject to appeal to the California appellate courts. The primary documents you need to review are the Complaint, the Answer and Counterclaim, and the Answer to Counterclaim. You can sort out the facts from those documents, but be sure to carefully note that some facts are undisputed or “admitted,” while others are hotly disputed. The relevant documents are posted on the TWEN website in a separate folder titled “Open Memo No. 3” under the “Writing Assignments” tab. Please download and carefully review those documents before proceeding with the assignment. Based upon the facts alleged in the pleadings, please analyzethe following questions in a formal office memo: 1. Are No Doubt’s claims for violation of the statutory and common law rights of publicity barred by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution or by Article 1, § 2 of the California Constitution?
  • 2. 2. Are No Doubt’s claimsfor violation of the statutory and common law rights of publicity barred by the Professional Services and Character License Agreement dated May 21, 2009? Your memo should include a heading similar to the heading of this memo. Use 12- point Times New Roman font and one-inch margins. Except for the heading, please double- space your memo and number the pages, centered at the bottom of each page. Please do not exceed ten double-spaced pages. (If longer, I will read only the first ten pages.) You may discuss the assignment and the legal authorities with other first-year students in Professor Goering’s RWA Sections (13 or 16). You may also discuss the assignment with Victoria Malony during her office hours or by appointment. Do not discuss the assignment with anyone else, including your other professors, roommates, parents, siblings, relatives, friends, acquaintances, or strangers. Finally, your writing must be exclusively yours. You may not show your written work to anyone except Victoria Malony or me. Victoria is not authorized to edit or revise your written work, which must be exclusively your own. You are expected to do your best work on your memo, which is equivalent to the final exam in this course.Your memo is due Tuesday, November 23, 2010, no later than 5:00 p.m. 2