1. "Emmet Otter's Jug Band Christmas" must be viewed at least 8 times prior to Christmas Day. Initial viewing is to be commenced upon putting up the Christmas tree.
2. On Christmas Eve, when enjoying a cocktail or 3, do not spout off about your boss. Uncle Hank and Cousin Randy may take you literally and do something rash.
3. The movie “A Christmas Story” should be watched in its entirety. However, one should resist temptation to stick their tongue on a flag pole. Do NOT purchase a Red Rider bb gun. You'll shoot your eye out! Also, be sure to drink your Ovaltine.
4. Non-consumption of those peanut butter cookies with the Hershey kiss in the middle is a serious offense.
5. Store bought eggnog is strictly prohibited.
6. A big screen TV is the gift that keeps on giving all year long.
7. Re-gifting is not a crime.
8. If your Secret Santa gives you a case of beer, it may be time to start planning some New Year’s resolutions.
9. Despite recent trends and policies, you will not be arrested if you utter the words “Merry Christmas.”
10. When in doubt, gift card it out.
Carbone & Carbone LLP, Martin A. Carbone, Esq., Attorney at Law
http://www.carbonelawyer.com/
www.facebook.com/carbonelawgroup
http://twitter.com/carbonelaw1
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Sunday, December 19, 2010
The Laws of Late Night TV
By now everyone is likely familiar with the whole Tonight Show controversy surrounding Jay Leno and Conan O’Brien. In terms of a legal standpoint, there is a virtual buffet of laws that have been touched upon through the course of this recent colossal debacle.
As it was stipulated in a contract set forth by NBC back in 2004, effective June 2009, Conan O’Brien, then host of Late Night, was to take over has host of the Tonight Show, replacing long time host Jay Leno. This was an unheard of arrangement, as Leno at the time was number one in terms of ratings and NBC was promising O’Brien the Tonight Show five years in the future. To put it mildly, a lot could happen in five years, and as it turns out, a lot did.
This whole debacle raises all sorts of legal issues centering around contracts, estoppel, detrimental reliance, intellectual property rights and so on. The fact that NBC allowed for this crazy snafu to occur after the much publicized Leno/Letterman controversy absolutely boggles my mind.
On a personal level, I have a soft spot for Conan O'Brien, as his Late Night show debuted my freshman year of college. At the time, the College of St. Rose didn't have cable so I only received one station on my ancient Samsung rabbit-ears TV. That channel, of course, was NBC. I watched Conan almost nightly and I grew to be a huge fan of his.
When NBC offered him the Tonight Show in 2004 to take it over in 2009, the contract stipulated that if they didn't go through with it as planned they would have to buy him out. During this five year holding period, Conan detrimentally relied on NBC's word that he would receive the Tonight Show come 2009. By relying on NBC, he passed on other offers from rival networks such as Fox to do a show for them and receive a more lucrative payday. Since NBC arguably broke the terms of the Conan deal, they had to contractually compensate him for his detriment, which was waiting 5 years and not entering into other offers based on reliance that NBC was going to give him the "ultimate prize" which to Conan was the Tonight Show.
What it all boiled down to was simple contract law. Conan's contract did not specify what time slot his version of the Tonight Show would air, it simply guaranteed him as host of the Tonight Show itself. Other late night hosts, however, all had contracts that were time slot specific such as David Letterman, Jay Leno and even relative newcomer to late night TV, Jimmy Kimmel. Why Conan's attorneys did not put such language in the contract is a mystery.
Since NBC was not contractually obligated to put Conan on at 11:35, they proposed a new Jay Leno show at that time for a half hour and then would shift Conan to 12:05, still calling his show the Tonight Show. As the world knows by now, Conan did not accept this proposal, to put it mildly and a buyout of his contract was worked out for an estimated $45 million, 15 of which allegedly went to his staff as compensation.
Jay Leno, on the other hand, had a "golden parachute" so to speak, as his contract with NBC regarding his failed 10 pm show was virtually iron clad. If NBC chose to dump him the pay out would have been approximately 3 times as to what they had to pay Conan and unlike Conan's contract, Jay had time specific language and could have placed an injunction on NBC to keep him on the air for at least another year or so. When Conan walked away from the proposed new time slot, Jay slid back into the Tonight Show seat as if the last 7 months were a bad dream.
Conan is now on TBS, having signed a deal similar to what David Letterman did back in 1993 with CBS. Conan now owns his show and has a lot more creative freedom. He will from here on out own all his comedy bits, which in the legal field fall under the category of intellectual property. Since NBC owned his version of the Tonight Show and his version of the Late Night show, all the recurring comedy segments such as In the Year 2000/3000, Triumph the Insult Comic Dog, Conando, If they Mated, etc. are owned by NBC and he can not use them outright. Letterman had the same issue when he moved to CBS but he simply changed some of the wording around in his bits, such as changing The Top Ten List to The Late Show Top Ten, and was able to rehash most of his old material. Conan, if need be, can do the same but as of this writing I did hear through the grape vine that NBC may allow him to use his old material, but it hasn't been officially confirmed.
This whole late night controversy all boils down to two things. Contracts and money. NBC felt Conan wasn't bringing in the ratings and revenue that Leno did at 11:35 pm and Leno was bombing at his new 10 pm time slot. NBC tried to resolve the situation by tinkering with things in an attempt to make all parties happy. Often when somebody tries to make everyone happy, they wind up making everyone miserable instead. This is what happened here, as Conan felt betrayed after 17 years of loyal service, as did Jay, for his 18 years of service. NBC had, and still has, in my opinion, a ton of egg on their face, especially having gone through a similar situation in 1992. After the Letterman fall out, it was not foreseeable that something like that would happen again at any network, let alone NBC. The ultimate moral of the story is, to take a page out of Stone Cold Steve Austin's playbook, "Don't trust anybody" when it comes to contracts. Always be sure that the I's are dotted and the T's are crossed.
On a final note, Conan's new show on TBS is great and I encourage all to check it out every Monday through Thursday at 11 pm. Support Team Coco.
Carbone & Carbone LLP, Martin A. Carbone, Esq., Attorney at Law
http://www.carbonelawyer.com/
www.facebook.com/carbonelawgroup
http://twitter.com/carbonelaw1
As it was stipulated in a contract set forth by NBC back in 2004, effective June 2009, Conan O’Brien, then host of Late Night, was to take over has host of the Tonight Show, replacing long time host Jay Leno. This was an unheard of arrangement, as Leno at the time was number one in terms of ratings and NBC was promising O’Brien the Tonight Show five years in the future. To put it mildly, a lot could happen in five years, and as it turns out, a lot did.
This whole debacle raises all sorts of legal issues centering around contracts, estoppel, detrimental reliance, intellectual property rights and so on. The fact that NBC allowed for this crazy snafu to occur after the much publicized Leno/Letterman controversy absolutely boggles my mind.
On a personal level, I have a soft spot for Conan O'Brien, as his Late Night show debuted my freshman year of college. At the time, the College of St. Rose didn't have cable so I only received one station on my ancient Samsung rabbit-ears TV. That channel, of course, was NBC. I watched Conan almost nightly and I grew to be a huge fan of his.
When NBC offered him the Tonight Show in 2004 to take it over in 2009, the contract stipulated that if they didn't go through with it as planned they would have to buy him out. During this five year holding period, Conan detrimentally relied on NBC's word that he would receive the Tonight Show come 2009. By relying on NBC, he passed on other offers from rival networks such as Fox to do a show for them and receive a more lucrative payday. Since NBC arguably broke the terms of the Conan deal, they had to contractually compensate him for his detriment, which was waiting 5 years and not entering into other offers based on reliance that NBC was going to give him the "ultimate prize" which to Conan was the Tonight Show.
What it all boiled down to was simple contract law. Conan's contract did not specify what time slot his version of the Tonight Show would air, it simply guaranteed him as host of the Tonight Show itself. Other late night hosts, however, all had contracts that were time slot specific such as David Letterman, Jay Leno and even relative newcomer to late night TV, Jimmy Kimmel. Why Conan's attorneys did not put such language in the contract is a mystery.
Since NBC was not contractually obligated to put Conan on at 11:35, they proposed a new Jay Leno show at that time for a half hour and then would shift Conan to 12:05, still calling his show the Tonight Show. As the world knows by now, Conan did not accept this proposal, to put it mildly and a buyout of his contract was worked out for an estimated $45 million, 15 of which allegedly went to his staff as compensation.
Jay Leno, on the other hand, had a "golden parachute" so to speak, as his contract with NBC regarding his failed 10 pm show was virtually iron clad. If NBC chose to dump him the pay out would have been approximately 3 times as to what they had to pay Conan and unlike Conan's contract, Jay had time specific language and could have placed an injunction on NBC to keep him on the air for at least another year or so. When Conan walked away from the proposed new time slot, Jay slid back into the Tonight Show seat as if the last 7 months were a bad dream.
Conan is now on TBS, having signed a deal similar to what David Letterman did back in 1993 with CBS. Conan now owns his show and has a lot more creative freedom. He will from here on out own all his comedy bits, which in the legal field fall under the category of intellectual property. Since NBC owned his version of the Tonight Show and his version of the Late Night show, all the recurring comedy segments such as In the Year 2000/3000, Triumph the Insult Comic Dog, Conando, If they Mated, etc. are owned by NBC and he can not use them outright. Letterman had the same issue when he moved to CBS but he simply changed some of the wording around in his bits, such as changing The Top Ten List to The Late Show Top Ten, and was able to rehash most of his old material. Conan, if need be, can do the same but as of this writing I did hear through the grape vine that NBC may allow him to use his old material, but it hasn't been officially confirmed.
This whole late night controversy all boils down to two things. Contracts and money. NBC felt Conan wasn't bringing in the ratings and revenue that Leno did at 11:35 pm and Leno was bombing at his new 10 pm time slot. NBC tried to resolve the situation by tinkering with things in an attempt to make all parties happy. Often when somebody tries to make everyone happy, they wind up making everyone miserable instead. This is what happened here, as Conan felt betrayed after 17 years of loyal service, as did Jay, for his 18 years of service. NBC had, and still has, in my opinion, a ton of egg on their face, especially having gone through a similar situation in 1992. After the Letterman fall out, it was not foreseeable that something like that would happen again at any network, let alone NBC. The ultimate moral of the story is, to take a page out of Stone Cold Steve Austin's playbook, "Don't trust anybody" when it comes to contracts. Always be sure that the I's are dotted and the T's are crossed.
On a final note, Conan's new show on TBS is great and I encourage all to check it out every Monday through Thursday at 11 pm. Support Team Coco.
Carbone & Carbone LLP, Martin A. Carbone, Esq., Attorney at Law
http://www.carbonelawyer.com/
www.facebook.com/carbonelawgroup
http://twitter.com/carbonelaw1
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Dealing with DWI
When charged with DWI, driving while intoxicated, there are a some key things to keep in mind. The first is cooperation. More often than not, individuals who are pulled over and asked if they have been drinking are not so quick to be honest with the police. The more cooperative you are, the less likely a threat you will impose on the officer this will ultimately be to your benefit in the long run.
When asked to submit to a breathalyzer test, some people feel that by refusing, the officer can't technically show that your blood alcohol content level was above the legal limit, which in New York state is .08 percent. However, if one refuses a breathalyzer, the officer can issue a ticket with a charge of DWI based on his or her personal and professional opinion and observation. This is why most often there are two charges of DWI on the ticket. One is based on the breathalyzer reading and the other is what the officer observed through his or her course of duty. Basically this is done in case the breathalyzer test becomes inadmissible. Think of it as the officer's "fail safe."
Once charged with DWI, most people, understandably so, are quite upset. The best thing to do is go into "cooperation mode" and seek out professional help in the form of an attorney who routinely practices in this area of law. Typically, if this is a person's first offence in terms of DWI, their attorney can enter negotiations with the District Attorney's office to reduce the charge to a DWAI, driving while ability impaired. After pleading to this reduced charge, the defendant will typically receive a 90 suspension of their driver's license. The court will immediately issue a 20 day temporary license, which will enable the defendant time to go to the DMV and apply for a conditional driver's license. This will allow one to drive to a limited amount of places of necessity, such as work, the grocery store, church, etc.
The District Attorney's office will also often require the defendant to take a number of prevention courses such as a VIP, victim impact panel and DDP, drinking and driving program. These courses are offered in every county throughout the state. A plea to DWAI is usually conditional upon completion of said programs. All of these steps can become a bit overwhelming so be sure to ask your attorney for guidance. A good DWI lawyer will take the time to slowly walk his client through all necessary steps and procedure.
Some counties in New York also require the defendant to under a drug and alcohol evaluation prior to accepting a finalized plea, or it may be a condition of the overall plea to DWAI. Again, cooperation is key. Do not try to "fight city hall" as the saying goes. The more cooperative a person is in completing the required courses, programs, and evaluations, the better off they will be in terms of a swift and sufficient resolution.
Carbone & Carbone LLP, Martin A. Carbone, Esq., Attorney at Law
http://www.carbonelawyer.com/
www.facebook.com/carbonelawgroup
http://twitter.com/carbonelaw1
When asked to submit to a breathalyzer test, some people feel that by refusing, the officer can't technically show that your blood alcohol content level was above the legal limit, which in New York state is .08 percent. However, if one refuses a breathalyzer, the officer can issue a ticket with a charge of DWI based on his or her personal and professional opinion and observation. This is why most often there are two charges of DWI on the ticket. One is based on the breathalyzer reading and the other is what the officer observed through his or her course of duty. Basically this is done in case the breathalyzer test becomes inadmissible. Think of it as the officer's "fail safe."
Once charged with DWI, most people, understandably so, are quite upset. The best thing to do is go into "cooperation mode" and seek out professional help in the form of an attorney who routinely practices in this area of law. Typically, if this is a person's first offence in terms of DWI, their attorney can enter negotiations with the District Attorney's office to reduce the charge to a DWAI, driving while ability impaired. After pleading to this reduced charge, the defendant will typically receive a 90 suspension of their driver's license. The court will immediately issue a 20 day temporary license, which will enable the defendant time to go to the DMV and apply for a conditional driver's license. This will allow one to drive to a limited amount of places of necessity, such as work, the grocery store, church, etc.
The District Attorney's office will also often require the defendant to take a number of prevention courses such as a VIP, victim impact panel and DDP, drinking and driving program. These courses are offered in every county throughout the state. A plea to DWAI is usually conditional upon completion of said programs. All of these steps can become a bit overwhelming so be sure to ask your attorney for guidance. A good DWI lawyer will take the time to slowly walk his client through all necessary steps and procedure.
Some counties in New York also require the defendant to under a drug and alcohol evaluation prior to accepting a finalized plea, or it may be a condition of the overall plea to DWAI. Again, cooperation is key. Do not try to "fight city hall" as the saying goes. The more cooperative a person is in completing the required courses, programs, and evaluations, the better off they will be in terms of a swift and sufficient resolution.
Carbone & Carbone LLP, Martin A. Carbone, Esq., Attorney at Law
http://www.carbonelawyer.com/
www.facebook.com/carbonelawgroup
http://twitter.com/carbonelaw1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
