Sign Up for Alerts
Sign up to receive receive industry-specific emails from our legal team.
Sign Up for Alerts
We provide tailored, industry-specific legal updates to our clients and other friends of the firm.
Areas of Interest
September 14th, 2022
How CC0 Can Help – or Hurt – NFT Projects
Blockchain Technology Co-Chair Jeremy S. Goldman is quoted in the article, “How CC0 Can Help – or Hurt – NFT Projects” published by The Block. The article speaks with IP lawyers for their take on the pros and cons of ‘creative commons’ (CC0), and copyright. Jeremy is quoted saying, “Copyright essentially allows individuals to have a monopoly over their creation for a certain period. Depending on the type of copyright license a creator adopts for their work, others may use that creator’s work for commercial and derivative use with or without attribution — but the intellectual property itself belongs to the original creator. When a creator copyrights their work, they are saying to consumers, ‘if you want if you like what I've created, and you want to use it and want to enjoy it, I am the only one who can give you permission to do that.’ By copyrighting their work, creators can seek legal action against those who they deem tread on their intellectual property.”
While, the landscape of NFTs and blockchain add a complicating layer to copyright, Jeremy says, “There is a ‘critical’ difference between the NFT and the art associated with that NFT. Once an NFT is minted, ‘it’s out in the wild.’” He adds, “NFT teams have absolutely no right or ability or power to do anything about the non-fungible token itself once it's been transferred out of their smart contract. The final decisions about the art, music or video associated with an NFT is ultimately left up to the original creators. When you buy the NFT, you're getting some additional layer of [ownership] rights, but you're not getting the intellectual property rights in the art. That's why there's some confusion. Those intellectual property rights are entirely controlled by the artists.”
Because of the complications that have arisen due to asset ownership and copyright, some NFT projects waived copyrighting their work and adopted CC0. Jeremy says, “If copyright adds barriers to a work, then, CC0 works like the upside-down world of copyright.” CC0 allows anyone to use an intellectual property without the creator’s permission.
Read the full article here.
Other Quoted
Data Privacy Roundup
The AdExchanger newsletter quotes Daniel M. Goldberg, highlighting key privacy enforcement trends. He provided an example of how opting in cookie tracking by clicking a bold “Allow All” button contrasted with declining tracing, which required a more involved two-step process. Mr. Goldberg pointed out that regulators saw this process as a “potential dark pattern.” “‘Symmetry of choice is the idea that it should be just as easy to accept as it is to reject,’” Goldberg said. ‘It’s an area regulators are looking very, very closely at.’” He also noted dark pattern fines, especially with the CPPA could become substantially larger. He underscored due diligence in programs, referencing recent privacy enforcement setttlements and fines. “‘All these cases involve vendor solutions that did not work,’ Goldberg said. ‘In almost all of them, the company did have privacy compliance in place; it just wasn’t working.’” View Article
July 25 2025
SHOOT’s 65th Anniversary Reflections: FKKS’ Managing Partner Jeffrey A. Greenbaum
SHOOT Magazine quotes Jeffrey A. Greenbaum in its 65th Anniversary coverage on where the advertising industry has been, is, and is going. Jeff discusses the most significant legal cases during his industry tenure and the accompanying lessons, the most pressing legal issues for the commercial production community, his most meaningful professional accomplishments, and the value he has gained from reading SHOOT. Read more.
July 24 2025
Companies Sought Help From Privacy Vendors. They Still Got Fined
Daniel M. Goldberg is quoted in Bloomberg Law on problems faced by companies who have relied on compliance vendors to help them navigate new privacy laws. The article stated that vendors operating with little oversight, outdated tech have “left businesses with consumer-facing websites open to fines and other enforcement actions.”
Bloomberg Law noted, “For example, giving consumers the option to disable cookies may not turn off all of a company’s tracking technology. So consumer data could still be automatically sent to a third party for advertising.
“Vendors cannot just repurpose tools meant to comply with EU’s data protection law for California’s rules, said Daniel M. Goldberg, chair of the data strategy, privacy & security group at Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC.
"‘Many solutions are solutions that are built for one purpose,’ Goldberg said, adding that some vendors’ ‘default configurations often aren’t drafted in a way that is sufficient to address US privacy law.’” View Article.
July 14 2025
