DOCSLIB.ORG

Entertainment Litigation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Entertainment Litigation Cases and Materials on Entertainment Litigation FIRST EDITION By DAN DOWNEY Adjunct Professor of Law South Texas College of Law ROLA DAABOUL South Texas College of Law J.D. Copyright 2013 CHAPTER ONE: COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT 1.01 Statutory Provisions ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.01(a) Exclusive Rights .............................................................................................................. 1 Herbert v. Shanley ............................................................................................................ 2 EMI April Music, Inc. v. White ......................................................................................... 3 Agee v. Paramount Communications ............................................................................... 9 1.02 Proof of Copyright Infringement ................................................................................................... 17 1.02(a) Basic Elements of Copyright Infringment ....................................................................... 18 Three Boys Music Corp. v. Bolton ................................................................................... 18 Dirk Laureyssens v. Idea Group ...................................................................................... 24 Bright Tunes Music Corp. v. Harrisongs ......................................................................... 25 Armour v. Knowles .......................................................................................................... 28 Selle v. Gibb .................................................................................................................... 32 Dimmie v. Carey .............................................................................................................. 40 Repp v. Webber ................................................................................................................ 46 Baxter v. MCA ................................................................................................................. 54 Arnstein v. Porter ............................................................................................................ 57 1.02(b) Originality ....................................................................................................................... 63 ZZ Top v. Chrysler ........................................................................................................... 63 Smith v. Jackson .............................................................................................................. 65 Swirsky v. Carey .............................................................................................................. 69 1.03(a) Sampling .......................................................................................................................... 72 Jarvis v. A&M Records .................................................................................................... 72 Newton v. Diamond ........................................................................................................ 77 Bridgeport Music Inc. v. Dimension Films ..................................................................... 83 Bridgeport Music, Inc., v. UMG ...................................................................................... 90 Copyright Infringement Flow Chart ............................................................................... 95 Sound Recordings Chart ................................................................................................. 96 1.03(b) Fair Use ........................................................................................................................... 97 Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc .................................................................................. 97 Lennon v. Premise Media Corp ..................................................................................... 107 1.03(c) Independent Creation ..................................................................................................... 117 Ellis v. Diffie .................................................................................................................. 117 1.03(d) Preemption .................................................................................................................... 119 Daboub v. Gibbons ........................................................................................................ 119 Brainard v. Vassar .......................................................................................................... 122 1.03(e) Statute of Limitations .................................................................................................... 131 Daboub v. Gibbons ......................................................................................................... 131 Stone v. Williams ............................................................................................................ 132 1.03(f) First Sale ........................................................................................................................ 141 Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc .............................................................................. 141 UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Augusto .................................................................................. 145 1.03(g) Compulsory License ...................................................................................................... 150 T.B. Harms v. JEM Records, Inc .................................................................................... 150 1.04 Derivative Works ........................................................................................................................... 157 Entertainment Research Group, Inc. v. Genesis Creative Group, Inc. ........................... 157 1.05 Works For Hire .............................................................................................................................. 164 Lulirama ......................................................................................................................... 164 1.06 Damages and Remedies ................................................................................................................. 174 Three Boys Music Corp. v. Bolton .................................................................................. 175 Jarvis v. A&M Records ................................................................................................... 178 Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc ................................................................................................... 184 Bridgeport Music Inc. v. Dimension Films .................................................................... 188 1.07 Secondary Liability ........................................................................................................................ 192 1.07(a) Contributory and Vicarious Liability ............................................................................. 192 A&M Records v. Napster, Inc ......................................................................................... 192 MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd ................................................................................ 205 Arista Records, LLC v. Usenet.com ................................................................................ 215 Viacom International, Inc. v. You Tube, Inc ................................................................... 228 UMG Recordings, Inc. v. VEOH .................................................................................... 232 1.07(b) Personal Liability .......................................................................................................... 245 Boz Scaggs Music v. KND Corp ..................................................................................... 245 Fermata International Melodies, Inc. v. Champions ..................................................... 248 CHAPTER TWO: TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT/UNFAIR COMPETITION 2.01 Statutory Provisions ....................................................................................................................... 255 2.02 Proof of Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition ........................................................... 256 Dastar Corporation v. Twentieth Century Fox File Corp .............................................. 256 Apple Corps, Limited v. Button Master, P.C.P. Inc ......................................................... 262 Estate of Elvis Presley v. Rob Russen............................................................................. 271 Elvis Presely Enterprises, Inc. v. Capece ....................................................................... 297 In Re Elvis Presley Enterprises, Inc ............................................................................... 313 Mattel, Inc. v. MCA Records, Inc ................................................................................... 316 Robi v. Reed.................................................................................................................... 325 Oliveira v. Frito-Lay, Inc ............................................................................................... 328 2.03 Secondary Liability .......................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • IV. We Find No Violation of Ferdinand's Right to Effective
    THREE BOYS MUSIC CORP. v. BOLTON 477 Cite as 212 F.3d 477 (9th Cir. 2000) IV. of substantial similarity was not clearly erroneous; (3) defendants did not rebut We find no violation of Ferdinand’s right presumption of copying with evidence of to effective assistance of counsel or any violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause, and independent creation; (4) jury could find therefore Ferdinand’s § 2254 petition was that plaintiff deposited complete copy of properly denied. Accordingly, we affirm song with copyright office; (5) jury’s attri- the judgment of the district court. bution of profits was not clearly erroneous; (6) record company was not entitled to deduct its Net Operating Loss Carry-for- ward (NOL) in connection with award of , profits; and (7) defendants were not enti- tled to new trial. Affirmed. THREE BOYS MUSIC CORPORA- 1. Copyrights and Intellectual Property TION, Plaintiff–Appellee, O51 Copyright plaintiff must prove (1) v. ownership of the copyright; and (2) in- Michael BOLTON, individually and fringement, meaning that the defendant d/b/a Mr. Bolton’s Music, Inc.; An- copied protected elements of the plaintiff’s drew Goldmark; Non–Pareil Music, work. Inc.; Warner–Chappell Music Limit- 2. Copyrights and Intellectual Property ed; Warner–Tamerlane Publishing 83(3.1) Corp.; WB Music Corp.; and Sony O Music Entertainment, Inc., Defen- Absent direct evidence of copying, dants–Appellants. proof of copyright infringement involves fact-based showings that the defendant Nos. 97–55150, 97–55154 had access to the plaintiff’s work and that United States Court of Appeals, the two works are substantially similar.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of Melodic Plagiarism Recognition Using Musical
    An Analysis of Melodic Plagiarism Recognition using Musical Similarity Algorithms Nick Schuitemaker ([email protected]) College number: 6259855 Bachelor Kunstmatige Intelligentie, UU June 2020 - 7.5 ECTS Attendant 1: Frans Adriaans Attendant 2: Jakub Dotlacil Abstract What we can see from this is that the rules are vague and often inconsistent, and this is a significant problem. Com- Court cases on melody infringement are decided based on panies can lose millions of dollars in a lawsuit that is based vague unspecified terms like the ‘substantial similarities’ be- tween melodies. It is then up to experts to unbiasedly explain on vague inconsistent rules like this. To solve this problem, these concepts to an untrained judge, which has often lead to we attempt to find an objective solution to help measure pla- controversial verdicts. This paper presents an attempt at ob- giarism. Many algorithms have been proposed to determine jectifying vague terms like ‘substantial similarity’ in cases of melodic plagiarism by testing whether existing melodic sim- similarities between songs. Mainly, these are so-called ‘Fin- ilarity algorithms can help determine plagiarism. Perceived gerprinting, algorithms designed to recover a song based on similarity by ordinary humans (intrinsic test) and expert anal- a possibly inaccurate sample. We intend to seek out the fea- yses in court (extrinsic test) are used to gather requirements that an algorithm needs to meet in order to accurately predict sibility of using these algorithms to determine plagiarism in plagiarism. Some well-known similarity algorithms and pre- music. This contributes to the area of Artificial Intelligence processing algorithms are presented and analyzed on whether by finding important use for computational methods to aid they meet the requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Helena Mace Song List 2010S Adam Lambert – Mad World Adele – Don't You Remember Adele – Hiding My Heart Away Adele
    Helena Mace Song List 2010s Adam Lambert – Mad World Adele – Don’t You Remember Adele – Hiding My Heart Away Adele – One And Only Adele – Set Fire To The Rain Adele- Skyfall Adele – Someone Like You Birdy – Skinny Love Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga - Shallow Bruno Mars – Marry You Bruno Mars – Just The Way You Are Caro Emerald – That Man Charlene Soraia – Wherever You Will Go Christina Perri – Jar Of Hearts David Guetta – Titanium - acoustic version The Chicks – Travelling Soldier Emeli Sande – Next To Me Emeli Sande – Read All About It Part 3 Ella Henderson – Ghost Ella Henderson - Yours Gabrielle Aplin – The Power Of Love Idina Menzel - Let It Go Imelda May – Big Bad Handsome Man Imelda May – Tainted Love James Blunt – Goodbye My Lover John Legend – All Of Me Katy Perry – Firework Lady Gaga – Born This Way – acoustic version Lady Gaga – Edge of Glory – acoustic version Lily Allen – Somewhere Only We Know Paloma Faith – Never Tear Us Apart Paloma Faith – Upside Down Pink - Try Rihanna – Only Girl In The World Sam Smith – Stay With Me Sia – California Dreamin’ (Mamas and Papas) 2000s Alicia Keys – Empire State Of Mind Alexandra Burke - Hallelujah Adele – Make You Feel My Love Amy Winehouse – Love Is A Losing Game Amy Winehouse – Valerie Amy Winehouse – Will You Love Me Tomorrow Amy Winehouse – Back To Black Amy Winehouse – You Know I’m No Good Coldplay – Fix You Coldplay - Yellow Daughtry/Gaga – Poker Face Diana Krall – Just The Way You Are Diana Krall – Fly Me To The Moon Diana Krall – Cry Me A River DJ Sammy – Heaven – slow version Duffy
    [Show full text]
  • Music Law and Business: a Comprehensive Bibliography, 1982-1991 Gail I
    Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal Volume 13 | Number 4 Article 5 1-1-1991 Music Law and Business: A Comprehensive Bibliography, 1982-1991 Gail I. Winson Janine S. Natter Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_comm_ent_law_journal Part of the Communications Law Commons, Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, and the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation Gail I. Winson and Janine S. Natter, Music Law and Business: A Comprehensive Bibliography, 1982-1991, 13 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J. 811 (1991). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_comm_ent_law_journal/vol13/iss4/5 This Special Feature is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Music Law and Business: A Comprehensive Bibliography, 1982-1991* By GAIL I. WINSON** AND JANINE S. NArrER*** Table of Contents I. Law Review and Journal Articles ......................... 818 A . A ntitrust ............................................ 818 B. Bankruptcy .......................................... 819 C. Bibliographies ....................................... 819 D . Contracts ........................................... 819 1. M anagem ent ..................................... 821 2. Personal Service ................................
    [Show full text]
  • Songs by Title Karaoke Night with the Patman
    Songs By Title Karaoke Night with the Patman Title Versions Title Versions 10 Years 3 Libras Wasteland SC Perfect Circle SI 10,000 Maniacs 3 Of Hearts Because The Night SC Love Is Enough SC Candy Everybody Wants DK 30 Seconds To Mars More Than This SC Kill SC These Are The Days SC 311 Trouble Me SC All Mixed Up SC 100 Proof Aged In Soul Don't Tread On Me SC Somebody's Been Sleeping SC Down SC 10CC Love Song SC I'm Not In Love DK You Wouldn't Believe SC Things We Do For Love SC 38 Special 112 Back Where You Belong SI Come See Me SC Caught Up In You SC Dance With Me SC Hold On Loosely AH It's Over Now SC If I'd Been The One SC Only You SC Rockin' Onto The Night SC Peaches And Cream SC Second Chance SC U Already Know SC Teacher, Teacher SC 12 Gauge Wild Eyed Southern Boys SC Dunkie Butt SC 3LW 1910 Fruitgum Co. No More (Baby I'm A Do Right) SC 1, 2, 3 Redlight SC 3T Simon Says DK Anything SC 1975 Tease Me SC The Sound SI 4 Non Blondes 2 Live Crew What's Up DK Doo Wah Diddy SC 4 P.M. Me So Horny SC Lay Down Your Love SC We Want Some Pussy SC Sukiyaki DK 2 Pac 4 Runner California Love (Original Version) SC Ripples SC Changes SC That Was Him SC Thugz Mansion SC 42nd Street 20 Fingers 42nd Street Song SC Short Dick Man SC We're In The Money SC 3 Doors Down 5 Seconds Of Summer Away From The Sun SC Amnesia SI Be Like That SC She Looks So Perfect SI Behind Those Eyes SC 5 Stairsteps Duck & Run SC Ooh Child SC Here By Me CB 50 Cent Here Without You CB Disco Inferno SC Kryptonite SC If I Can't SC Let Me Go SC In Da Club HT Live For Today SC P.I.M.P.
    [Show full text]
  • Aes 143Rd Convention Program October 18–21, 2017
    AES 143RD CONVENTION PROGRAM OCTOBER 18–21, 2017 JAVITS CONVENTION CENTER, NY, USA The Winner of the 143rd AES Convention To be presented on Friday, Oct. 20, Best Peer-Reviewed Paper Award is: in Session 15—Posters: Applications in Audio A Statistical Model that Predicts Listeners’ * * * * * Preference Ratings of In-Ear Headphones: Session P1 Wednesday, Oct. 18 Part 1—Listening Test Results and Acoustic 9:00 am – 11:00 am Room 1E11 Measurements—Sean Olive, Todd Welti, Omid Khonsaripour, Harman International, Northridge, SIGNAL PROCESSING CA, USA Convention Paper 9840 Chair: Bozena Kostek, Gdansk University of Technology, Gdansk, Poland To be presented on Thursday, Oct. 18, in Session 7—Perception—Part 2 9:00 am P1-1 Generation and Evaluation of Isolated Audio Coding * * * * * Artifacts—Sascha Dick, Nadja Schinkel-Bielefeld, The AES has launched an opportunity to recognize student Sascha Disch, Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated members who author technical papers. The Student Paper Award Circuits IIS, Erlangen, Germany Competition is based on the preprint manuscripts accepted for the Many existing perceptual audio codec standards AES convention. define only the bit stream syntax and associated decod- A number of student-authored papers were nominated. The er algorithms, but leave many degrees of freedom to the excellent quality of the submissions has made the selection process encoder design. For a systematic optimization of encod- both challenging and exhilarating. er parameters as well as for education and training of The award-winning student paper will be honored during the experienced test listeners, it is instrumental to provoke Convention, and the student-authored manuscript will be consid- and subsequently assess individual coding artifact types ered for publication in a timely manner for the Journal of the Audio in an isolated fashion with controllable strength.
    [Show full text]
  • P. Diddy with Usher I Need a Girl Pablo Cruise Love Will
    P Diddy Bad Boys For Life P Diddy feat Ginuwine I Need A Girl (Part 2) P. Diddy with Usher I Need A Girl Pablo Cruise Love Will Find A Way Paladins Going Down To Big Mary's Palmer Rissi No Air Paloma Faith Only Love Can Hurt Like This Pam Tillis After A Kiss Pam Tillis All The Good Ones Are Gone Pam Tillis Betty's Got A Bass Boat Pam Tillis Blue Rose Is Pam Tillis Cleopatra, Queen Of Denial Pam Tillis Don't Tell Me What To Do Pam Tillis Every Time Pam Tillis I Said A Prayer For You Pam Tillis I Was Blown Away Pam Tillis In Between Dances Pam Tillis Land Of The Living, The Pam Tillis Let That Pony Run Pam Tillis Maybe It Was Memphis Pam Tillis Mi Vida Loca Pam Tillis One Of Those Things Pam Tillis Please Pam Tillis River And The Highway, The Pam Tillis Shake The Sugar Tree Panic at the Disco High Hopes Panic at the Disco Say Amen Panic at the Disco Victorious Panic At The Disco Into The Unknown Panic! At The Disco Lying Is The Most Fun A Girl Can Have Panic! At The Disco Ready To Go Pantera Cemetery Gates Pantera Cowboys From Hell Pantera I'm Broken Pantera This Love Pantera Walk Paolo Nutini Jenny Don't Be Hasty Paolo Nutini Last Request Paolo Nutini New Shoes Paolo Nutini These Streets Papa Roach Broken Home Papa Roach Last Resort Papa Roach Scars Papa Roach She Loves Me Not Paper Kites Bloom Paper Lace Night Chicago Died, The Paramore Ain't It Fun Paramore Crush Crush Crush Paramore Misery Business Paramore Still Into You Paramore The Only Exception Paris Hilton Stars Are Bliind Paris Sisters I Love How You Love Me Parody (Doo Wop) That
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1: Synthesis
    7 | SYNTHESIS CHAPTER 1. SYNTHESIS This chapter provides the rationale and context for Enquiries into Intellectual Property’s Economic Impact and highlights its most significant findings. In doing so, the chapter presents the major themes of the overall report, which are 1) the importance of various types of intellectual property as sources of growth and innovation in today’s economies; and 2) the effects on IP systems and stakeholders of major developments such as content digitisation, the growth of the Internet, and globalisation. The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities or third party. The use of such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements in the West Bank under the terms of international law. It should be noted that statistical data on Israeli patents and trademarks are supplied by the patent and trademark offices of the relevant countries. ENQUIRIES INTO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'S ECONOMIC IMPACT © OECD 2015 8 | SYNTHESIS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Key challenges • Copyright appears to be the type of IP that has been attracting business investment at the highest growth rate and it is undergoing statutory review in many countries, yet there are fewer empirical studies about copyright than about patents. Encouraging and enabling the collection and availability of more data on copyright would facilitate data-driven copyright policy. In fact, robust evidence on the use of IP rights generally and on their economic and social impacts is essential for sound IP systems. Presently, however, relatively little concrete evidence is available to support the common assumption that IP rights encourage greater innovation and creativity.
    [Show full text]
  • Tolono Library CD List
    Tolono Library CD List CD# Title of CD Artist Category 1 MUCH AFRAID JARS OF CLAY CG CHRISTIAN/GOSPEL 2 FRESH HORSES GARTH BROOOKS CO COUNTRY 3 MI REFLEJO CHRISTINA AGUILERA PO POP 4 CONGRATULATIONS I'M SORRY GIN BLOSSOMS RO ROCK 5 PRIMARY COLORS SOUNDTRACK SO SOUNDTRACK 6 CHILDREN'S FAVORITES 3 DISNEY RECORDS CH CHILDREN 7 AUTOMATIC FOR THE PEOPLE R.E.M. AL ALTERNATIVE 8 LIVE AT THE ACROPOLIS YANNI IN INSTRUMENTAL 9 ROOTS AND WINGS JAMES BONAMY CO 10 NOTORIOUS CONFEDERATE RAILROAD CO 11 IV DIAMOND RIO CO 12 ALONE IN HIS PRESENCE CECE WINANS CG 13 BROWN SUGAR D'ANGELO RA RAP 14 WILD ANGELS MARTINA MCBRIDE CO 15 CMT PRESENTS MOST WANTED VOLUME 1 VARIOUS CO 16 LOUIS ARMSTRONG LOUIS ARMSTRONG JB JAZZ/BIG BAND 17 LOUIS ARMSTRONG & HIS HOT 5 & HOT 7 LOUIS ARMSTRONG JB 18 MARTINA MARTINA MCBRIDE CO 19 FREE AT LAST DC TALK CG 20 PLACIDO DOMINGO PLACIDO DOMINGO CL CLASSICAL 21 1979 SMASHING PUMPKINS RO ROCK 22 STEADY ON POINT OF GRACE CG 23 NEON BALLROOM SILVERCHAIR RO 24 LOVE LESSONS TRACY BYRD CO 26 YOU GOTTA LOVE THAT NEAL MCCOY CO 27 SHELTER GARY CHAPMAN CG 28 HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN WORLEY, DARRYL CO 29 A THOUSAND MEMORIES RHETT AKINS CO 30 HUNTER JENNIFER WARNES PO 31 UPFRONT DAVID SANBORN IN 32 TWO ROOMS ELTON JOHN & BERNIE TAUPIN RO 33 SEAL SEAL PO 34 FULL MOON FEVER TOM PETTY RO 35 JARS OF CLAY JARS OF CLAY CG 36 FAIRWEATHER JOHNSON HOOTIE AND THE BLOWFISH RO 37 A DAY IN THE LIFE ERIC BENET PO 38 IN THE MOOD FOR X-MAS MULTIPLE MUSICIANS HO HOLIDAY 39 GRUMPIER OLD MEN SOUNDTRACK SO 40 TO THE FAITHFUL DEPARTED CRANBERRIES PO 41 OLIVER AND COMPANY SOUNDTRACK SO 42 DOWN ON THE UPSIDE SOUND GARDEN RO 43 SONGS FOR THE ARISTOCATS DISNEY RECORDS CH 44 WHATCHA LOOKIN 4 KIRK FRANKLIN & THE FAMILY CG 45 PURE ATTRACTION KATHY TROCCOLI CG 46 Tolono Library CD List 47 BOBBY BOBBY BROWN RO 48 UNFORGETTABLE NATALIE COLE PO 49 HOMEBASE D.J.
    [Show full text]
  • 7 41 F.2D 896 United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
    7 41 F.2d 896 United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Ronald H. SELLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Barry GIBB, et al., Defendants-Appellants, and Ronald H. SELLE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Barry GIBB, et al., Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 83–2484, 83–2545. | Argued April 13, 1984. | Decided July 23, 1984. Opinion CUDAHY, Circuit Judge. The plaintiff, Ronald H. Selle, brought a suit against three brothers, Maurice, Robin and Barry Gibb, known collectively as the popular singing group, the Bee Gees, alleging that the Bee Gees, in their hit tune, “How Deep Is Your Love,” had infringed the copyright of his song, “Let It End.” The jury returned a verdict in plaintiff’s favor on the issue of liability in a bifurcated trial. The district court, Judge George N. Leighton, granted the defendants’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and, in the alternative, for a new trial. Selle v. Gibb, 567 F.Supp. 1173 (N.D.Ill.1983). We affirm the grant of the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. I Selle composed his song, “Let It End,” in one day in the fall of 1975 and obtained a copyright for it on November 17, 1975. He played his song with his small band two or three times in the Chicago area and sent a tape and lead sheet of the music to eleven music recording and publishing companies. Eight of the companies returned the materials to Selle; three did not respond. This was the extent of the public dissemination of Selle’s song.1 Selle first became aware of the Bee Gees’ song, “How Deep Is Your Love,” in May 1978 and thought that he recognized the music as his own, although the lyrics were different.
    [Show full text]
  • LIT2013000004 - Andy Gibb.Pdf
    •, \.. .. ,-,, i ~ .«t ~' ,,; ~-· ·I NOT\CE OF ENTR'Y.OF APPEARANCE AS AllORNE'< OR REPRESEN1' Al\VE DATE In re: Andrew Roy Gibb October 27, 1978 application for status as permanent resident FILE No. Al I (b)(6) I hereby enter my appearanc:e as attorney for (or representative of), and at the reQUest of, the fol'lowing" named person(s): - NAME \ 0 Petitioner Applicant Andrew Roy Gibb 0 Beneficiary D "ADDRESS (Apt. No,) (Number & Street) (City) (State) (ZIP Code) Mi NAME O Applicant (b)(6) D ADDRESS (Apt, No,) (Number & Street) (City} (ZIP Code) Check Applicable ltem(a) below: lXJ I I am an attorney and a member in good standing of the bar of the Supreme Court of the United States or of the highest court of the following State, territory; insular possession, or District of Columbia A;r;:ka.nsa§ Simt:eme Coy;ct and am not under -a (NBme of Court) court or administrative agency order ·suspending, enjoining, restraining, disbarring, or otherwise restricting me in practicing law. [] 2. I am an accredited representative of the following named religious, charitable, ,social service, or similar organization established in the United States and which is so recognized by the Board: [] i I am associated with ) the. attomey of record who previously fited a notice of appearance in this case and my appearance is at his request. (If '!J<?V. check this item, also check item 1 or 2 whichever is a1wropriate .) [] 4. Others (Explain fully.) '• SIGNATURE COMPLETE ADDRESS Willi~P .A. 2311 Biscayne, Suite 320 ' By: V ? Litle Rock, Arkansas 72207 /I ' f.
    [Show full text]
  • Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} All I Want for Christmas... Is No Christmas by Colton Aalto Saara Aalto
    Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} All I Want for Christmas... Is No Christmas by Colton Aalto Saara Aalto. Saara Sofia Aalto (born 2 May 1987) is a Finnish singer, songwriter, and voice actress. In 2012, she came second in the first season of The Voice of Finland. In 2016, Aalto finished as the runner-up in the thirteenth series of The X Factor UK, which gained her international recognition. In 2018, Aalto represented Finland in the Eurovision Song Contest 2018. She qualified for the grand final and finished in 25th place. Later that year, Aalto became a judge on X Factor Suomi. Early life. Born in Oulunsalo, Finland, Aalto grew up in a musical family and received piano lessons from pianist and pedagogue Olga Maslak, born in Odessa, Soviet Union. Aalto wrote her first song at the age of five. Her close relatives include painter and documentary director Eeli Aalto and magician Simo Aalto. In 1998 at age 11, she won the Kotka Maritime Festival song contest for children with one of her own compositions. Aalto also won the Charlotte Church[4] international singing competition, organised in US, in 2003 with her own composition.[5][6] Aalto represented Finland in the Golden Stag International Song Contest in Romania in 2004. She went to the Madetoja secondary school for music, where she graduated in 2005. After graduation, she moved to Helsinki to study music at the Sibelius Academy, and at the same time also studied singing in the Helsinki Pop & Jazz Conservatory. Career. 2007–2011: Career beginnings In 2007, she participated in Talent Suomi ("Talent Finland"), finishing in the top three.
    [Show full text]