Cedar Boschan in the Wall Street Journal

I commented in The Wall Street Journal on accounting messes and other blowback when employees at Meta and other companies 'slice the salami' of employer perks.

The court of public opinion is divided.

Read the article by Callum Borchers here: https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/careers/the-little-sins-we-commit-at-workand-the-bosses-who-are-cracking-down-74929770?st

How to Effectively Depose a Financial Expert: A Guide for Attorneys

Depositions can make or break a case, especially when it comes to financial experts who may provide critical testimony. For attorneys dealing with intellectual property, royalty disputes, or damages claims, a strong deposition of an opposing expert is key to uncovering flaws in their analysis, challenging their damages conclusions, or shoring up your own case. Here's how to prepare and execute an effective deposition of a financial expert according to me, your expert.

Forensic Accountant Cedar Boschan

Involve Your Financial Expert Early

Retaining your own financial expert before discovery begins is crucial, especially in complex cases. Early involvement allows your expert to advise on discovery requests, such as interrogatories and document production, that will provide the data necessary for a thorough analysis. This proactive approach can lead to a more accurate understanding of the case’s financial aspects, allowing your expert to better rebut opposing testimony.

Involving your expert early also helps you anticipate weaknesses in the opposing expert's report, giving you a strategic advantage in depositions​

Understand the Opposing Expert’s Background and Qualifications

Review the expert’s qualifications, including their education, certifications, and professional experience. A financial expert with less relevant experience may struggle to explain complex valuation or auditing principles under pressure. Look for gaps in their credentials or areas where they may be overreaching.

Know the Opposing Expert's Report Inside Out

Start by thoroughly reviewing the expert's report and any supporting materials. Identify the key points of their analysis, especially any assumptions or methodologies that seem questionable. Make sure you understand the subject matter enough to spot inconsistencies or potential errors. Collaborating with your own financial expert during this stage can provide deeper insights into the opposing expert's weaknesses.

Decide Your Deposition Approach: Tie Them Down or Impeach?

When cross-examining a financial expert during deposition, it’s tempting to go after them aggressively. However, this can backfire.

Before you start, consider your goal for the deposition. Do you want to tie the expert to their opinions so they can’t modify them later, or are you aiming to impeach their credibility and methodology?  These two approaches require different strategies:

1. Tie them down: Focus on obtaining the expert’s opinions and gathering information underlying and locking them into a position that limits their flexibility at trial. Use this strategy when the expert seems sound but could be vulnerable under scrutiny. By getting clear answers, you can later work with your own financial expert to identify areas of weakness to address during trial. Leaving the hard-hitting cross-examination for trial ensures you won’t accidentally educate the expert on your strategies.
   
   
2. Impeach: Alternatively, if you aim to discredit the expert, look for opportunities to expose flaws in their methodology, challenge assumptions, or highlight bias. This approach can be risky as it may inadvertently "show your hand." In other words, it may cause the opposing expert to prepare by strengthening their testimony at trial, especially if they can correct their mistakes or clarify their testimony before then. To avoid this, it’s important to carefully plan your cross-examination with your financial expert early-on.

Tip: In many cases, a hybrid strategy can be employed - locking down the expert’s opinions while subtly probing for impeachment opportunities without showing your hand. 

Leverage Your Expert to Assist with Drafting Deposition and Cross-Examination Questions

Ask your expert to identify credibility weaknesses questions using tactics such as:

• Challenge their expertise if it appears they are not specialized in the relevant area (e.g., royalty audits vs. damages calculations)
• Ask about their track record in court or deposition to see if they have any vulnerabilities as a witness
• Establish bias or conflicts of interest including financial incentives, such as compensation structure

Sample questions:

• How many times have you testified for the opposing party or similar clients?
• What percentage of your income comes from working as an expert witness?
• Are there any professional or personal relationships with the party that could affect your impartiality?

An expert’s credibility can be damaged if you can show they selectively included or ignored data that doesn’t support their conclusions.  Therefore, ask your expert to highlight inconsistencies or omissions in the opposing expert's report or record. You can use the deposition to further uncover inconsistencies in the expert’s testimony, either with their report, other testimony, or known facts of the case. 

Ask the opposing expert to clarify:

• Why they chose certain data points while ignoring others
• If any alternative methods were considered and why they were rejected
• If there is any academic or industry criticism of the approach they used

A financial expert’s methodology is a crucial point of attack. Ask your expert to look closely at the processes the opposing experts used to arrive at their conclusions and ask detailed questions designed to disclose the following:

• Were industry standards followed? 
• Did they selectively ignore data? 
• Did they combine nominal and real rates —an error that skews projections and can be a major vulnerability during trial?
• Are they using current or historical data inconsistently?
• Did they overlook important factors, like work-life expectancy or inflation projections?
• What generally accepted specific methods did you rely on for your analysis?
• How do those standards apply to the facts of this case?
• Have you ever used a different method in similar cases? Why or why not?
• What assumptions did they base their analysis on?
• Are the expert's assumptions well-supported by the evidence?
• Has the expert made any mathematical or interpretive errors?

Have the opposing expert explain complex calculations in layman’s terms. Their inability to articulate their process clearly could cast doubt on the reliability of their analysis.

Test Their Limits: Push Beyond the Opposing Expert's Comfort Zone

Experts, no matter how experienced, have limits. Use the deposition to find those limits by probing deeply into their knowledge of specific accounting principles, economic theories, or valuation techniques. This can reveal overconfidence or expose gaps in their expertise, especially if the expert is more generalist than specialist.

Explore their depth of knowledge by asking:

• Can you explain the basis for [specific financial principle] in this context?
• How would this approach differ if the facts were [adjusted scenario]?
• Have you ever been criticized for this methodology in past cases?
  
  

Stay Focused: Avoid Tangential Debates with the Opposing Expert

While it may be tempting to engage in deep financial debates, remember that your goal is to collect information and expose weaknesses. Avoid getting bogged down in overly technical details that distract from your strategy. Keep the deposition focused on the big picture: undermining the expert’s credibility and methodology while gathering useful admissions.

Prepare for Trial Using the Opposing Expert's Key Admissions

Finally, try to lock the opposition's expert into key admissions that will support your case or undermine theirs. These admissions can be used during trial to cast doubt on the expert’s analysis or reliability. Aim for clear, concise statements on points where the opposing expert’s opinion is weakest or most vulnerable. 

During trial, your financial expert can then highlight these weaknesses, helping to undermine the opposing expert’s credibility in front of the jury.

Key admissions to target:

• Concessions about the limits of their analysis
• Acknowledgment of alternative approaches they could have taken
• Agreement that certain assumptions were subjective or speculative
  
  

Final Thoughts

Deposing a financial expert requires careful preparation and an understanding of both legal and financial principles. By asking the right questions and maintaining focus, you can reveal flaws in the expert's analysis, highlight biases, and make their testimony less compelling at trial.

Attorneys handling cases involving forensic accounting or intellectual property rights should be well-versed in these techniques to ensure a successful deposition. With the right approach, you can turn a financial expert from a strong adversary into a liability for the opposing side.

Navigating Corporate Challenges: The Essential Role of Entertainment and IP Expertise on Corporate Boards

In today's rapidly evolving business landscape, corporate boards are facing unprecedented challenges. Whether it's adapting to digital transformations, managing intellectual property (IP) in the age of technology, or navigating an increasingly complex legal and regulatory environment, companies are in need of board members with specialized expertise. One area that is often overlooked—but becoming increasingly critical—is the entertainment and IP sectors. Directors who can bring a deep understanding of these areas offer invaluable insights that can strengthen risk management, improve strategic planning, and bolster governance practices.

The Increasing Importance of Intellectual Property

As companies shift from a product-based economy to one driven by content, creativity, and innovation, the importance of intellectual property as a corporate asset has soared. IP management now touches industries far beyond entertainment and media, affecting sectors from technology to consumer goods. Content creation, brand identity, and patented technologies all fall under the umbrella of IP assets, which means that boards need directors who can not only appreciate the value of these assets but also ensure their protection and proper monetization.

Understanding the intricacies of IP is crucial for effective governance. Boards that fail to incorporate IP expertise risk exposing the company to unnecessary litigation, loss of competitive advantage, and missed opportunities for licensing or partnerships. For example, directors who have firsthand experience in IP-heavy industries are better equipped to identify emerging risks, such as the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) on copyright, or the legal ramifications of digital streaming and content sharing platforms.

Risk Management and Legal Oversight

With the fast pace of innovation in digital and creative sectors, corporate boards are also tasked with understanding the legal frameworks that govern intellectual property. This is not limited to traditional industries like film and music but now encompasses technology, biotech, and even manufacturing, where patents and trademarks play a crucial role.

Boards need to be proactive in managing IP-related risks, whether it’s defending patents or copyrights in court, or ensuring compliance with new regulations like data privacy laws and global trade agreements. Legal missteps can be costly, not only in terms of financial penalties but in reputational damage. Having directors who understand these legal intricacies can provide essential guidance, preventing issues before they arise and ensuring that the company remains in compliance with shifting regulatory landscapes.

Moreover, effective risk management in the realm of IP extends beyond merely understanding legal obligations. It involves actively participating in strategic discussions about how to leverage intellectual property for growth, how to guard against infringement, and how to capitalize on new revenue streams from licensing or joint ventures.

Strategic Thinking for the Digital Age

In addition to legal and risk management concerns, strategic thinking is another area where corporate boards can benefit from entertainment and IP sector expertise. In the digital age, traditional business models are being disrupted at an unprecedented rate. Boards need to be forward-thinking, anticipating not only potential risks but also opportunities for growth and innovation. This is particularly true for companies looking to expand into digital content, media platforms, or technologies that rely heavily on creative assets.

Strategic board members with experience in industries driven by intellectual property and creativity are often well-versed in adapting to change, as these sectors are regularly impacted by technological advancements and shifts in consumer behavior. A director with a deep understanding of how IP and digital content evolve can offer critical insights during key decision-making processes, whether it's exploring new partnerships, expanding into new markets, or defending against potential disruptors.

Governance and Compliance: More Than Just Box-Ticking

In the wake of high-profile corporate scandals, governance has become a central focus for boards across all industries. But while regulatory compliance is a key aspect of good governance, it must go beyond mere box-ticking. Effective governance involves fostering a culture of accountability, transparency, and proactive decision-making.

Boards can gain a competitive edge by including members who understand their fiduciary duty to investors and how to integrate compliance with broader business goals. For companies managing complex portfolios of IP assets, this can mean ensuring proper royalty auditing, monitoring licensing agreements, and enforcing rigorous standards in contract negotiations. Strong governance in these areas is essential not only for maintaining shareholder trust but also for securing the company’s long-term financial health.

Adapting to Regulatory Change

The intersection of government policy, public relations, and intellectual property is another area where experienced directors add value. Rapid changes in technology, coupled with evolving public policy, mean that boards must be constantly aware of how regulatory shifts could impact their business. Whether it’s negotiating the evolving frameworks surrounding digital copyright, managing data privacy regulations, or complying with new international trade agreements, businesses need directors who understand the broader implications of these changes.

Directors with experience navigating these regulatory waters can help boards anticipate challenges, develop strategies to adapt, and maintain compliance without sacrificing innovation. For example, upcoming changes in copyright law may have significant implications for companies producing digital content, and directors with specialized knowledge can ensure that the company is well-positioned to adapt to these changes.

Conclusion

The need for specialized expertise on corporate boards is clear, particularly in industries driven by intellectual property and rapid technological change. As companies face growing challenges related to governance, risk management, and legal oversight, having directors who understand the nuances of IP management, regulatory compliance, and strategic innovation can be the difference between thriving and merely surviving in today's competitive environment. As the role of intellectual property continues to expand, companies that invest in board members with this unique expertise will be better equipped to manage risks, seize opportunities, and drive long-term value.

Trademarks: Your Introduction to Powerful Protections for Business and Consumers

In the bustling bazaar of modern commerce, trademarks, service marks, and trade secrets are the guardians of brand identity and innovation. Whether your client dreams of launching the next Spotify or safeguarding their boutique's unique logo, understanding these tools is vital for success and security.

From choosing a winning trademark to assessing damages when infringement strikes, here’s a basic overview (thought, not legal advice - contact me if you need a referral to legal counsel) of how to fortify your client’s brand for the long haul.

What's in a Name? Trademarks and More.

At their essence, trademarks (often referred to as "Marks" in legal agreements) identify the source of goods, while service marks signify the origin of services. Similarly, trade dress encompasses the overall visual appearance of a product or its packaging, including elements like shape, color, design, and texture, that signals its source to consumers. While these assets can be extraordinarily valuable to a brand, helping it stand out in a crowded marketplace, their primary purpose is consumer protection. They ensure that consumers can confidently identify and purchase products or services from the source they trust, reducing confusion and enhancing reliability - whether through a clever logo, a distinctive sound, or even a signature shade of color. For example:

• The Target bullseye is an instantly recognizable logo.
  
  
• The Skype ringtone is a registered sound mark.
  
  
• Tiffany & Co.’s "robin egg blue" is a registered color trademark.

Bottom Line: Distinctiveness is key in trademark law. The USPTO places trademarks on a spectrum from fanciful to generic. The more original and creative, the stronger the protection.

Here’s How We Dissect Distinctiveness

• Fanciful: Coined terms like "Kodak" or "Verizon."
  
  
• Arbitrary: Real words with unrelated meanings, such as "Amazon" for e-commerce.
  
  
• Suggestive: Names that hint at features, like "Greyhound" for a bus service.
  
  
• Descriptive: "Best Buy"—requires proof of acquired distinctiveness.
  
  
• Generic: "Smartphone"—cannot be trademarked.

Bottom Line: Encourage clients to aim for fanciful or arbitrary marks whenever possible to avoid the pitfalls of weaker protections.

The Secret Sauce: Trade Secrets

While trademarks make a splash in the spotlight, trade secrets prefer to stay in the shadows. These can include formulas, methods, or insider knowledge that provide a competitive edge - think the recipe for KFC chicken or the Coca-Cola formula.

Ensuring trade secrets remain under lock and key requires vigilance. To protect these assets, businesses should:

1. Limit access to key personnel
   
   
2. Use NDAs and robust confidentiality agreements
   
   
3. Regularly audit to confirm compliance and update their protection policies

A well-guarded trade secret can deliver competitive advantages that are both invaluable and enduring.

Guarding the Crown Jewels: Trademark and Trade Secret Strategies

When helping clients protect their intellectual property, remember: proactive steps save time and money. Here’s how to build a strong defense:

• Trademark Searches: Dig Before You Plant A clearance search is essential before filing a trademark application. Start with a simple Google search and a visit to the USPTO database. If the name passes initial scrutiny, invest in a professional clearance search (services like Corsearch or Markify can help).
  
  
• Smart Filing Strategies Educate clients on the two main trademark application types:
• Intent-to-Use (1B): Reserves rights for future use, giving startups flexibility
• Use-Based (1A): Requires proof of actual use in commerce, such as product photos or transactional evidence

Maintaining Protection Trademarks aren’t “set it and forget it.” They require renewal every 10 years and proof of use within five years of registration. Help your clients stay vigilant to ensure their rights remain active.

Damages Done Right

When a trademark is infringed or a trade secret misappropriated, the financial repercussions can be significant. That’s where damage assessments become critical. From calculating lost profits to determining unjust enrichment, precise analysis is key to a strong case—or defense.

For instance, I help attorneys build a compelling claim for or robust defense against the following:

• Actual Damages/Lost Profits: Quantify how sales were diverted due to confusion or theft.
  
  
• Unjust Enrichment / Disgorgement: Analyze how much the infringer benefited financially.
  
  
• Reasonable Royalties: Determine what a fair licensing agreement might have looked like.

My experience as a forensic accountant ensures your calculations are thorough and persuasive, supporting your clients’ positions with authority.

From Bazaar to Boardroom

Finally, remind clients that a trademark is more than a name; it’s a promise of quality, reputation, and trust. Encourage them to think expansively, not just protecting their current offerings but anticipating future growth. A clothing line today might blossom into a full lifestyle brand tomorrow.

Investing in intellectual property is a strategy for resilience and longevity, not merely a legal checkbox. Don’t just help your clients survive the competitive marketplace - help them thrive. With the right strategy, their brand can become iconic, their trade secrets impenetrable, and their legal defenses unassailable. Or at least the odds can be improved.

And in this realm of rights and registrations, the right expert is your most valuable ally, to help hold licensees and infringers accountable to their respective agreements and the law.  For example, I conduct royalty audits of trademark licensees, such as merchandise companies. I also have formed expert opinions, submitted reports and testified to help the USTPO and Federal Courts reach fair rulings on mark disputes. Call me for for referrals to trademark attorneys or expert consulting services at (424) 248-8866, or visit my firm's website for more details or to clear conflicts.

Nominal vs. Real Rates: The Golden Rule of Intrinsic Valuation

In the high-stakes game of valuation, where spreadsheets meet storytelling, one golden rule stands above all: match your growth rate with your discount rate. Sounds simple, doesn’t it? But even seasoned attorneys, music publishers, and investors can find themselves in murky waters if they mix up nominal and real interest rates. Let’s clear the air:

Nominal vs. Real: A Quick Refresher

Think of nominal rates as your bedazzled, full-glam version—reflecting the current glitz and inflation of the market. Real rates, by contrast, are the stripped-down, no-frills edition. They focus solely on purchasing power, removing inflation from the equation.

As NYU Professor Aswath Damodaran, known as the valuation guru himself, and whose classes I have taken , reminds us of "Consistency Principle 1: Nominal cash flows should be discounted at nominal discount rates; Real cash flows should be discounted at real discount rates." Mismatching them is the financial equivalent of wearing sneakers to a black-tie gala—it simply doesn’t work.

Why It Matters in Intrinsic Valuation

Intrinsic valuation hinges on precision. When forecasting cash flows, you might account for inflation in your growth rate. If so, your discount rate must include inflation as well—because, like a perfect duet, these rates must harmonize.

Here’s the twist: forgetting to align nominal with nominal or real with real can lead to either undervaluation or overvaluation. For instance:

• Using a nominal growth rate with a real discount rate: You’ll underestimate the present value of cash flows, which can result in undervaluing assets—whether that’s a publishing catalog or a litigation award.
  
  
• Using a real growth rate with a nominal discount rate: You’ll inflate valuations like a poorly mixed cocktail—beautiful at first sip, but ultimately a headache.

Getting it Right: Application for Music Publishing Investors & Attorneys

For investors eyeing music publishing catalogs, growth rates often reflect expected increases in royalties—typically influenced by inflation. In this case, your discount rate should be nominal. Similarly, litigation attorneys evaluating settlement awards or damages tied to future earnings must remain vigilant in aligning these rates to avoid leaving money—or credibility—on the table.

Matchmaker, Matchmaker: Pair Your Rates Like a Pro

Matching your growth rate and discount rate is neither science nor art. It’s about making the best decisions with the data you have.  And with that, should you wish your valuations to sparkle with clarity, my firm Boschan Corp. is here to assist - find more information about our services by clicking here.

Bold Journey Magazine Interviews Cedar Boschan

I enjoyed recently being interviewed by Bold Journey magazine, because it gave me time to reflect on one of the key skills needed to be a top forensic accountant: communication. 

I truly appreciate the mentors and consultants who helped me on my journey to be a better communicator, especially Fred Wolinsky, CPA, Jennifer Wilson, and David Zyla.

If you are interested in joining my team at Boschan Corp., or engaging our firm, you will find that we accord greater emphasis on communication than other accounting firms.  Click here to apply.

To all readers: What communication techniques, tactics and skills do you think are under-or-over-rated when it comes to accounting services?

Looking for my Successor as Treasurer/CFO of Roar As One

Are you interested in a volunteer opportunity to make a difference in people's lives by using your accounting skills? At Roar As One, we have a role with a low time commitment in exchange for great board service and CFO experience serving 501 (c) (3) nonprofit. If you are interested, please contact Huyen Nguyen at Boschan Corp. at 424-248-8866.

My 9-Year-Old on NFTs

My 9-year-old saw I was reading an article about #NFTs and she said, "NFTs are stupid. You can just screen shot it."

— Cedar Boschan (@auditrix) November 19, 2021

Cedar Boschan Quoted in Rolling Stone

“I’m not surprised it took a long time, and I’m glad she hung in there,” says Cedar Boschan, the head of a firm that regularly audits labels over royalty payments. “I’m glad [Sony] turned on the faucet; that’s what’s really important.”  

Click here to read the article.

Cedar Boschan on Rising Pressure to Improve Creators' Royalties

Rolling Stone and Billboard recently interviewed me regarding Sony's "Legacy Artist Royalty Plan."  You can read about it here.

On the heels of Sony's announcement, the United Kingdom's Members of Parliament have found cause for a "'complete reset of streaming' that 'enshrines in law rights to a fair share of the earnings,'" which you can read about here.

Given concerns of inflation in the US, and the rising social pressure to fairly compensate creators, do you think the CRB will be more apt to consider our comments on the proposed mechanical rate freeze?

Are you going to comment on such settlement for the CRB to consider? (Click here for instructions on how to register to comment, although the mobile interface was a bit different for me.)

2016 Year in Review - Tech & Game News

Professionally speaking, in 2016, I found articles about in-app purchases, the value of interactive game deals, pricing of bundles and discounting to be most relevant news to my practice of auditing game publishers and distributors, while right of publicity cases like this and this were most relevant to my forensic accounting work.

Further, followers of my tech feed on Twitter - especially game developer CFOs and attorneys - were most engaged by the following news in 2016, especially news reported by Gamasutra and VentureBeat:

• Sony kicked off the year in January by trying to trademark "Let's Play" and upsetting the Internet (per VentureBeat)
• In February, a Studio was sued for some video game tattoos (per Kotaku) and a Steam developer engagingly wrote about why his game is worth $20 (per Gamasutra)
• Gamasutra and VentureBeat pieces on an indie dev's crowdfunding fail and Disney's mobile games business, as well as a Polygon post on an old mobile game that earns $100 million in China every month engaged Twitter & LinkedIn during March
• A judge in April found Amazon liable for in-app charges racked up by kids (per VentureBeat) while, per Gamespot, a former Grand Theft Auto exec sued Take-Two Interactive for $150M in royalties (his case was allowed to proceed this week)
• In May, a Lexology  post on Canada's Quebec Superior Court's case, Seggie v. Roofdog Games Inc., titled "Who is the Author of Videogame Software for Copyright Purposes?
• NewZoo in June released its free "2016 Global Games Market Report," which included the following takeaways:
• China is now the global leader in video game revenues, but Latin America is growing the fastest
• Mainstream media companies want in in the esports action
• Virtual reality is not changing the business that much
• Gamers wish "to collect collect, create, show off [virtual items], and ultimately earn money from doing so"
• Handheld is down, but mobile is up
• Projection that the game market will grow from $92 billion in 2015 to $119 billion in 2019 (Note: according to a more recent report from SuperData Research, the game market hit $91 billion in 2016, so estimates vary.)
• Nintendo released Pokémon Go in July and pieces about its profit model and rollercoaster valuation were popular: while App Annie marveled that it was making $10 million every day without cannibalizing other games, an expert blogger on Gamasutra investigated the answer to the question: "Can Pokémon Go Monetise?"  Nintendo's stock rose $9 billion on the success of Pokémon Go, then corrected. Mashable reported, "Nintendo admits it's not making much money off 'Pokémon Go', loses $6.7 billion in market value."
  
  Also in July, Blizzard sued an Overwatch cheat-maker per Gamespot.
• In August, I spoke at the Beverly Hills Bar Association about legal issues with superstar experts in the game business.  

  

  Beverly Hills Bar Association Panel at Lawry's Prime RibL-R: Ivy Kagan Bierman, Roy Rosenthal, Keith Boesky & Cedar Boschan (Jim Charne not pictured)

  
  

  

  Beverly Hills Bar Association Panel at Lawry's Prime RibL-R: Jim Charne pictured on the screen, Ivy Kagan Bierman, Roy Rosenthal, Keith Boesky & Cedar Boschan

  Click here to watch our discussion for 1 hour of specialized CLE credit (although the panelists listed on the linked site are incorrect)
• The biggest news among my September news feed followers was Lindsay Lohan losing her Grand Theft Auto V right of publicity lawsuit (per Kotaku)
• Nielsen in October released a report, covered by VentureBeat: "Mobile games live and die on how fast developers can crank out new content"
• By November, followers were most interested reading about the video game voice actors strike (this article per Gamasutra), which continues as of the date hereof.
• So far this month (December 2016), Twitter followers are most interested in more articles from Gamasutra: a post recycled from June - What does $1 million buy in game development?  Also, in case you missed it, YouTuber Pewdiepie trolled us all and deleted his "alternate" channel.

There were many shares of information that did not engage readers, so I did not mention them.  What was the most interesting games earnings news story not mentioned here, especially those that pertain to royalties and/or damages?

Calendar: Wednesday, December 9, 2015: Talk on Royalty & Participation Audits

The Beverly Hills Bar Association will present on Wednesday, December 9, 2015 a program on royalty and profit participation audits:

Our founder, auditor and forensic accountant Cedar Boschan, will lead top accounting and legal audit professionals in discussion about:

• Drafting accounting, objection and audit provisions in contracts
• Making the call to audit, hiring an auditor and issuing audit and objection notices
• Working closely with accountants to smoothly complete audits
• Negotiating tolling agreements, settlements and, at times, litigating

Forensic accountant and royalty auditor Cedar Boschan Moderates Panel at Lawry's

The panelists will discuss these and other elements of modern royalty and profit participation audits to empower attorneys in attendance to optimize settlements for your clients.  
Speakers include an auditor and a litigator who mutually represent plaintiffs including Richard Dreyfuss in a current case against Walt Disney Pictures, as well as an executive from MGM:

• Neville Johnson, Esq.; Partner at Johnson & Johnson LLP
• Edward Slizewski, Esq.; Senior Vice President at Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc.
• David Robinson, CPA; Owner at Robinson & Company
• Moderator: Cedar Boschan; Founder, Boschan Corp.

Attorneys who attend the lunch at Lawry's The Prime Rib in Beverly Hills (or who watch the program online) may receive 1.5 hours of MCLE credit.

Registration is now open - click here to register!

LA Calendar: October 17, 2015

The University of Southern California's Gould School of Law and The Beverly Hills Bar Association will present the 2015 Institute on Entertainment Law and Business on Saturday, October 17.

Mailer from USC's 2015 Institute on Entertainment Law and Business

Our founder Cedar Boschan will speak during the afternoon at The Institute about the search for revenue stability in the evolving music market.  Ms. Boschan earned her bachelor of science in music industry from USC's Thornton Music School in 1999, where her instructors included fellow panelist, attorney and author Todd Brabec, as shown in the Institute's new mailer, pictured below:

USC 2015 Institute on Entertainment Law and Business Music Industry Speakers Include: Cedar Boschan, Todd Brabec, Esq., Kent Liu, Esq., and Tess Taylor

Attorneys who attend the Institute may receive 6.25 hours of MCLE credit, including 1 hour of legal ethics credit.  CPAs may receive up to 5.5 hours of CPE credit.

Registration is now open - click here to register!

Top Three: E3 Edition

Below are the Top 3 #E3 items shared in our @RoyaltyExpert Twitter feed:

Cedar Boschan and Evan Van Zelfden @gamelawpro at the Video Game Bar Association #VGBA #E3 cocktail reception sponsored by @LathamWatkins

• A day of surprises at the start of #E3 | VentureBeat

• EA: "We have to start building new #IP that might feel like a big risk today" | gamesindustry.biz

We extend an invitation for those of you visiting the next E3 event in Los Angeles:

Los Angeles Calendar: June 25, 2015 Music Publishing Valuation Panel

The Association of Independent Music Publishers will present music valuation panel discussion on June 25 at Lawry's in Beverly Hills, California.
Registration is now open - click here to register!

AIMP Catalog Valuation Panel:  Beyond the MultipleThursday, June 25 at 11:30 amLawry's Restaurant in Beverly Hills, CaliforniaTickets & Information: Click Here

Join the AIMP for lunch as speakers delve beyond the multiple to reveal how parties from buyers to banks price music assets.  Music valuation expert and AIMP Treasurer Cedar Boschan will moderate this highly informative discussion among world class valuation experts, so mark your calendars for June 25.
Speakers:

Jason Somerville, Managing Partner, EIG

Josh Gruss, CEO, Round Hill Music

Dan Coleman, Managing Partner, Modern Works Music Publishing

Derek Crownover, Esq., Partner & Entertainment Law Practice Leader, Dickinson Wright 

Cedar Boschan, Founder, Boschan Corp

Mark Your Calendar: Cinco de Mayo

The Recording Academy and California Lawyers for the Arts will present a music industry panel discussion May 5 at The GRAMMY Museum in Downtown, Los Angeles:

The Legal Landscape for Compensating Content CreatorsTuesday, May 5 at 6:00 pmThe GRAMMY Museum in Los Angeles, CaliforniaTickets & Information: Click Here

The below experts will discuss why music revenue and royalties are at all time lows, the history of music distribution, how content creators (and artists) are paid, the applicable laws and legislation, and the present and future landscape for creating and selling music.
Panelists:

• Jay Cooper, Esq., Greenberg Traurig LLP
• Dina LaPolt, Esq., LaPolt Law PC
• Cedar Boschan, Boschan Corp. & Auditrix, Inc.
• Edwin McPherson, Esq., McPherson Rane LLP

Moderator:

• Keith Cooper, Esq., de la Peña & Holiday LLP

The GRAMMY Museum will be open at 6:00 p.m. for attendees to view the exhibitions. The program runs from 7:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.

The museum entrance is on Figueroa, between The Farm of Beverly Hills and Flemings.

Paid parking is available in nearby public lots.
Click here for more details.

Top Tweets YTD from the Auditrix 2015 Twitter Feed

Below are the popular tweets from the Auditrix twitter feed, which focuses on music economics and royalties, during 2015 YTD:

• Duff McKagan on royalty audit of Geffen: "Well, they didn't pay us on something like 6 million records."
• YouTube Music Key Drew Criticism from Indies
• Apple spent up to $50 million for a music data company 
• Swedish songwriters called for more clarity and fairness over digital royalty distribution
• Sly Stone testified in royalties lawsuit against his former manager and won   
• Katy Perry's lawyers demanded takedown of 3D printable Left Shark and filed a trademark claim for Left Shark
• Federal District Courts "have been improperly applying a quantitative and not qualitative #copyright analysis... "
• Elvis Presley Turns 80: What Is the King's Legacy Worth?
• Sony's Lynton said: No Plans to Sell Music Publishing Business
• The Best Time to Release Your Album: A Month by Month Guide
• The U.S. Copyright Office Embraced Big Shake-Up to Music Licensing Regime 

Best Unfinished Twitter Conversation with Glenn Peoples @ Billboard and John Strohm @ Loeb

• Jas Prince Sued Birdman For Drake Royalties
• Tony Braxton's Ex-Husband Auctioned Off Royalties To Pay Back Child Support
• Kiplingers: Shouldn't Music Streaming Sites Pay Higher Royalties?
• Medium: Why Do All Records Sound the Same? 

April 2012 Events of Interest

April 4, 2012 @ USC - I am looking forward to serving as a panelist at USC's "Launching Your Career -- an event providing direct access to the music profession’s most successful"

Panelists include:

• Cedar Boschan ’99, Partner at Hurewitz, Boschan & Co. LLP
• Laura Connelly, Director of Presentations for the Los Angeles Philharmonic Association
• Julia Cser ’01, Executive and Artistic Director of the Maestro Foundation
• Gregg Field, Producer and Recording Artist at Concord Records
• Gordon Goodwin, Performing Artist with Wingood Music Productions, Inc.
• Garry Kief, President/CEO of STILETTO Entertainment
• Bear McCreary ’02, Composer
• Don Passman, Music Attorney
• Adrian Spence, Artistic Director, Camerata Pacifica
• Chad Smith, Vice President of Artistic Planning for the Los Angeles Philharmonic
• Association
• Moderator: Gail Eichenthal, Program Director for KUSC

April 17, 2012 @ Lawry's - The Assoc. of Independent Music Publishers (AIMP) presents David Israelite - President and CEO of NMPA

April 24, 2012 @ Sportsmen's Lodge - The California Copyright Conference presents "OH CANADA: It's Not The 51st State When It Comes To Managing Your Music Rights" where agents of both English and French-speaking repertoire will discuss exploitation and revenue collection in Canada.

Music Rights: A Global View - April 20, 2010 Panel Discussion at The California Copyright Conference

Teri Nelson Carpenter and I will co-moderate on April 20, 2010 a panel of top music executives from France, The Netherlands and Canada. We will discuss:

• Pan-European Licensing
• Legislation
• Neighboring Rights
• Emerging Markets

The panel of your international music business partners will feature:

• Claude Gaillard - Deputy Director, Member Relations - SACEM
• Christian Sarrazin - Vice President - Industry Relations and Strategic Intelligence - SOCAN
• Wim van Limpt - International Account Manager Member Services BUMA/STEMRA
• Gino Olivieri - President, Premier Muzik International Corporation NEIGHBORING RIGHTS / ROYALTY RECOVERY

DETAILS:

Tuesday, April 20, 2010
6:15 PM Check-In * 6:30 PM Cocktails * 7:00 PM Dinner

COURTYARD BY MARRIOTT, 15433 Ventura Blvd, Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 (Near Sepulveda & Ventura Blvd., just west of the 405 freeway)
Parking entrance on Orion Avenue
Free parking with validation. For map and directions, Click Here

Appetizer: California Mixed Green Salad
Entrée: Chicken Marsala, Beef Stroganoff or Vegetarian Pasta
Dessert: Chef's Choice

CCC Members $40 per person / Non-members $50 per person

RESERVE YOUR SEAT NOW - RESERVATIONS ACCEPTED UNTIL
10:00 AM FRIDAY, April 16, 2010

Please help us make this an enjoyable experience for everyone by using the reservation system. A failure to reserve by the deadline may result in not receiving your preferred choice of dinner entree.

Register online with your credit card at www.theccc.org

Or use our voicemail system (818-379-3312)
Dinners payable at the door by cash or check only. No credit cards.