The Shipping News

A case recently came down from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit entitled OneBeacon Insurance Co. v. Haas Industries, Inc. (No. 08-16826/D.C. No. 3:07-cv-03540-BZ) that has key implications for those in the arts -- especially those involved in property management and the transportation of everything from cameras to costumes to things craft services.
           Without going into all of the procedural details of this appellate case, the crux of the matter is that a transportation or carrier company (e.g., FedEx) can limit its liability -- meaning that it is very important for those in charge of that which is being transported to carefully review the tariff(s) provided by the carrier because a carrier is now only required to:

1. provide a shipper with the carrier’s tariff if the shipper requests it;
2. give the shipper a reasonable opportunity to choose between two or more levels of liability;
3. obtain the shipper’s agreement as to the shipper's choice of carrier liability limit; and,
4. issue a bill of lading prior to moving the shipment that reflects any such agreement.

           Number one above is the rub: if a shipper fails to request a tariff or ask about increased levels for insuring the goods during transportation, a claim for lost goods might just end up being based one something like a plain-vanilla, per pound value that comes with the basic tariff.
Let's say you are the producer of a Shakespearean show that is going to move from venue A to venue B (and B here stands for Bigger venue, with Bigger ticket prices and a much Bigger audience...I do like to be optimistic...). Assume that the aggregate value of the struck set, costumes, lighting and effects is over $200,000.00. However, the weight for all of this is only 300 pounds. If you -- as the shipper -- do not ask to see the tariff and select a higher level of coverage (sometimes nominated as "excess valuation" or "declared value"), the struck set, hand embroidered costumes, lighting equipment and effects that cost thousands of dollars that end up getting lost and/or damaged in transit might only have a claim value of $2.00 per pound, resulting in only $600.00 (cue the screechy horror film violins here).
           In light of this, always ask to see a carrier's tariff(s) and reflect upon whether it makes sense to select a level of coverage above and beyond the carrier's "standard" tariff either directly from the carrier or under supplemental insurance that your production company either has for the production from one or more entertainment industry insurers or can be purchased on a one-time basis for the particular shipping from venue A to venue B. Often, extra coverage is not that cost-prohibitive and can really result in peace of mind for the shipper, as well as more money should a claim for loss have to be made. If all of this seems to call for more paperwork than you might want to handle then, well, cue your lawyer here.
           For shippers, chances are you've already got a website. In California (and as discussed within this Blog) a Privacy Policy is mandatory...so if you've taken the time and trouble to post a Privacy Policy and the website's Terms of Use, why not post up your tariffs too? Again, cue your lawyer here to have him or her draft and/or review the tariff to be posted. Also, take the time to have your counsel look over all of your forms for clarity as real clarity often help prevents misunderstandings; and prevented misunderstandings reduce -- if not eliminate -- lawsuits before they begin.
           Put into an analogous concept, shippers should think about their documents along the same lines that they think about their fleet: quality machinery helps for timely shipment and delivery (and thus payment), all helping a shipper run the shipping business more smoothly and profitably. A shipper's contractual documents are -- if you'll forgive me a pun here -- part and parcel to transportation success.
           And here endeth the lesson...for now....

The Once & Future Medieval....

Well, it may or may not all be about the various forms of arts and entertainment...I do delve into other legal and historical topics as well. Slightly less exciting but definitely less salacious then much of the Medieval programming currently making the rounds on "cable", check out one of my articles posted on The Medieval Archives page at http://www.medievalarchives.com/2011/04/05/some-medieval-law.

Remember When, Mad Men

Recent entertainment industry news has highlighted that the next season of Mad Men will likely not be seen until 2012. This delay will likely accumulate into a perceived hiatus for fans of this show, seriously undermining its longevity in the process. Put into marketing parlance, think “buzz kill”. This author would like nothing better to be proven wrong about the foregoing prediction, but while not exactly an entertainment law per se, it is axiomatic that supply creates demand and the converse is just as true: lack of supply decreases demand.

While no program lasts forever, diminishing the supply of a show tends not to be a recipe for success: viewers will (literally) look elsewhere for similar and/or other programming.

Sadly, business and marketing history repeatedly reveal examples of this sort of scenario. Remember Rainier Beer? They had an ad campaign that garnered much attention many years ago: a television ad containing a motorcycle sound matched with a voice over that went, “raiiii-nieeeeer-beeeeeeeer” as the visual of the motorcycle drove towards a mountain and out of the frame. It quickly became the talk-of-the-town and people flocked to their local stores to buy it. Guess what? Rainier Beer did not have sufficient stock to meet the demand and the product became past history all to quickly. And granted, while entertainment is not beer, sometimes a little bit of Harvard Business Review-type analysis can be revealing; what does not work for selling a physical product might just not work for marketing a motion picture, a play, a television show, a radio program or a podcast.

In the case of Mad Men, what was supplied was a show that had similarities to The Sopranos (there Tony was the man-in-the-corner-office; in Mad Men, Don Draper occupies a similar role) with intelligent writing, an excellent cast, outstanding production and so on, and so on. Unfortunately, and as with The Sopranos, as seasons progress with Mad Men, it looks like there are going to be longer gaps between each season and fewer shows per season.

Not to sound too much like the penultimate pessimist here, this author can offer up an example of another program whose supply created demand and, in turn, that demand was progressively satisfied. The original Star Trek series turned out to be such a hit that the original (and later) fans never forgot it. Later, movies with the original cast came out. Then, there was Star Trek, The Next Generation. After that, more movies. And after that, another series. Thus was created that Star Trek “franchise”, an ongoing movable feast.

Food – be it actual or proverbial – for thought.