Twitter Google +1 Facebook LinkedIn Share this page RSS


Art, Entertainment & FashionView Industry as PDF

BSCR attorneys have experience counseling and representing local, national, and international clients in the broad range of issues encountered by those in the art, entertainment and fashion industries.

Our attorneys represent individuals, and companies of all sizes, from the independent entrepreneur to the Fortune 500 Company, from the fashion designer to the apparel manufacturer and retailer, from the independent musician to the record company, and from the commercial art gallery to the non-profit museum.

Specifically, our attorneys counsel and represent clients in the following areas: 

  • Business formation and structuring
  • Contracts and agreements (distribution, employment, endorsement, leasing, licensing, marketing, merchandising, non-compete/disclosure, royalty, trade secret and more)
  • Trademark, copyright, and patent infringement litigation
  • Employee benefits, executive compensation, and workplace policies
  • Import, export and customs
  • Labor and employment
  • Litigation, alternative dispute resolution and appeals
  • Royalty collection
  • Trade secret misappropriation
  • Trademark and copyright registration, monitoring, enforcement and defense

Additionally, our attorneys volunteer and are otherwise involved in organizations supporting the art, entertainment and fashion industries, such as the Volunteer Lawyers & Accountants for the Arts, St. Louis Fashion Fund, Arts KC, and National Bluegrass Organization.

For more information
about the services we provide to the Art, Entertainment & Fashion industries contact John Patterson in Kansas City at 816.471.2121 or Jacqueline Gebhardt in St. Louis at 314.231.2925.

News & Events

Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice Promotes John Patterson to Member

01.11.18 | Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice is pleased to announce the promotion of John Patterson to Member effective January 1, 2018. Patterson practices in the areas of product liability, employment, construction/fidelity and surety, financial services litigation, premises liability...

Blog Posts

Political Divisions, Copyright Law, and a Strange Green Amphibian Meme - Pepe the Frog gets his Day in a Kansas City Area Court

02.27.18 | Pepe the Frog, a cartoon character created by comic book artist Matt Furie in the mid-2000’s, started out innocently enough. According to an interview given by Furie to the Daily Dot, Pepe’s philosophy on life was simply “feels good man.” Unfortunately for Pepe, however...

Paying the Piper (and the Copyright Owner) - The Music Modernization Act of 2017

02.02.18 | The rise of streaming music services has changed the landscape in ways that most would not have imagined even a decade ago. Among these changes are the ways in which performers, songwriters, and other copyright owners are compensated when their works are streamed on various devices.

Copyright Law: Overcoming Claims of Copyright Protection for Derivative Works

01.11.18 | In the recent case of We Shall Overcome Foundation, et al. v. Ludlow Music, Inc., et al., the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York was asked to determine the validity of the copyright to “We Shall Overcome,” the seminal tune of the civil rights movement made famous by folk singer Pete Seeger, which had been registered as a “derivative work” with the Copyright Office, twice in the early 1960’s.

Gender Stereotypes Now Serve as a Basis for Sex Discrimination Claim under the MHRA

12.18.17 | Despite an uptick in advocacy, support, and inclusion of the LGTBQ community over the past several decades, as of today, discrimination based on sexual orientation remains an invalid claim under the Missouri Human Rights Act (“MHRA”). However, in a recent decision by the Western District of the Missouri Court of Appeals...

Court of Appeals Affirms that At-Will Employment Is Not Sufficient Consideration for an Arbitration Agreement, Refuses to Change Law

12.14.17 | The Missouri Court of Appeals for the Southern District upholds denial of an employer’s motion to compel arbitration ruling that at-will employment is insufficient consideration to support an arbitration agreement and denying employer’s request to find that, in accordance with federal policy, at-will employment should be sufficient consideration for an arbitration agreement.