Ipse Dixit


Peter Labuza on the Legal History of Motion Picture Contracts

Season 1, Ep. 422

In this episode, Peter Labuza, a Ph.D. Candidate in Cinema and Media Studies at the University of Southern California and the host of The Cinephiliacs podcast on film criticism, discusses his work on the rise of the legal profession in Hollywood and its role in reshaping both creative labor and financial management of the film industry after World War II. Labuza begins by briefly describing the history of the motion picture industry, from its early free-form days, through the highly regimented studio system, to the shift to independent production. He observes that the prevailing view holds that changes in the motion picture industry were caused by important judicial opinions, but argues that changes in contracting practices also played an important role. He reflects on several different case studies, including the career of the important entertainment lawyer Leon Kaplan. He also discusses interdisciplinary scholarship from the perspective of a humanities scholar doing legal research. Labuza is on Twitter at @labuzamovies.

This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Associate Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye.

More Episodes


Aliza Shatzman on Holding Judges Accountable

Season 1, Ep. 758
In this episode, Aliza Shatzman, an attorney and advocate based in Washington, DC, discusses her article "Untouchable Judges? What I've learned about harassment in the judiciary, and what we can do to stop it," which will be published in the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law. Here is the abstract:Drawing from the author’s own experience of gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation during her clerkship and in the years following it by a former DC Superior Court judge, this Article analyzes the deficits in current federal and DC judicial reporting systems to demonstrate the urgent need for reform. I argue that harassment in the judiciary is pervasive, due to both enormous power disparities between judges and law clerks, and various institutional barriers that perpetuate misconduct and discourage reporting. I survey existing methods of judicial discipline in both the federal and DC Courts and argue that these provide insufficient redress for workplace misconduct. I then discuss the Judiciary Accountability Act (JAA) (HR 4827/S 2553), which would finally protect judiciary employees, including law clerks and federal public defenders, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, enabling employees to sue their harassers and seek damages for harm done to their careers, reputations, and future earning potential. Furthermore, I argue that the DC Courts should be included in the JAA, because they are Article I courts created and regulated by Congress, and DC Courts judges are arguably federal judges for Title VII and disciplinary purposes. I also offer a variety of other proposed reforms, which would both strengthen the JAA and provide additional protections to uniquely vulnerable judiciary employees. I conclude by reflecting on my attempts to report the misconduct I experienced, how the systems failed me when I tried to report, and my efforts to seek justice for myself and accountability for the misbehaving former judge.This episode was hosted byBrian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at@brianlfrye.