Comments on: Another Perspective on Conan’s Contract

By: guest

guest — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:08:39 +0000

You guys are all missing the key issue here…where is the CONSIDERATION!?!? We know that she provided legal services, but the story doesn’t say *anything* about him paying her. Did he pay her in cash? in kind? how much? nominal? unconscionable?
Without answering these questions first, you can’t even talk about the timeslot clause because in all likelihood the contract wasn’t even valid in the first instance!

By: guest

guest — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 16:35:22 +0000

Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of business negotiations would know that the reason Conan’s contract was less “ironclad” than Leno’s was because he had less leverage than Leno when he negotiated his contract with NBC.
Even the best lawyers in the world wouldn’t have been able to get Conan terms that were comparable to Leno’s. Leno was the king of Late Night at his peak.

By: guest

guest — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 16:03:12 +0000

2 and anyone else commenting that this attorney’s comments violated a rule of ethics be stupid.

By: guest

guest — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:42:02 +0000

16/20
For someone who claims what “EVERYONE” knows about Entertainment Contracts you sure aren’t using your head much.
Although the “full settlement” is confidential, the public part (or the leaked part as the case may be) is about $45 million. That’s significantly more than litigation costs.
Further, O’Brien’s contract had a three year non-compete clause. Or at least news reports widely reported that Jeff Zucker could keep O’Brien off the air until 2013. The settlement agrees that O’Brien will be able to appear on another network starting September 1st, 2010. Less than a year after the settlement.
It seems pretty clear to me that the settlement went in Conan’s favor.
Given that the potential “breach” that Conan would allege is NBC Moving his show from 11:30pm to 1:00am it’s pretty clear that the contract MUST have contained some language implying that the tonight show had to be at 11:30.
Otherwise, NBC would have moved the show, told Conan to suck it up, and if he didn’t like it, he would have gotten a litigation costs settlement of a couple million and be stuck not competing.
I think everything else is just posturing. NBC’s lawyers probably told them that it would cost $150 million to buy out Leno and only $45 Million to buy out Conan, and they decided Conan would go.
But first, they tell Conan that “we’re moving your show to 1:00am. If he’s a pushover he might take it, even if the contract says otherwise. Even if it’s a low chance, what exactly does NBC lose?
Then he fights it, they make the payout, and they’re done.

By: guest

guest — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:06:06 +0000

1. Conan’s show was not funny
2. Conan got his writers from Craigslist
3. Conan was fine at 1:00 a.m., he doesn’t have the chops for 11:30
4. Jeff Zucker is the moron who ran NBC into the ground
5. Patty Glaser needs to get laid.

By: guest

guest — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:35:48 +0000

All you brilliant people.
See if the law firm that negotiates his next contract is the same as the one that did his last one.
Then you’ll know just how brilliant *he* thought his old contract was.

By: guest

guest — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 13:32:30 +0000

27,
You are brilliant. I wonder why no one thought of that.
LOL.

By: guest

guest — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 13:28:53 +0000

“Really? So by that logic, she couldn’t say ‘He’s happy with the outcome’ without a waiver from Conan? Hell, she couldn’t say ‘I represent Conan’ without a waiver from Conan?”
13/28,
There are indeed cases in which the mere fact that a lawyer is representing a client is confidential and cannot be disclosed by the attorney. That is most likely not the case here, which is why I didn’t raise that issue.
“The contract has been seen not only by Conan and his lawyers, but also by NBC and their lawyers, and presumably lots and lots of other people. If it ever made its way into a court filing, it’s been seen by everybody in the world. So commenting on the terms of the obviously-not-confidential contract would be a breach of attorney-client confidentiality… how exactly?”
The fact that NBC and other people have seen the contract does not necessarily make it permissible for Conan’s lawyers to discuss the contract. Using that logic, a lawyer would be able to discuss any contract because every contract is seen by the other party or parties.
- 2

By: guest

guest — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 13:28:20 +0000

By: guest

guest — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 13:09:54 +0000

24 – I’m assuming you’re 2 as well, and I repeat my statement that you’re either an overeager 2L or a moron (13 here, hi).
The contract has been seen not only by Conan and his lawyers, but also by NBC and their lawyers, and presumably lots and lots of other people. If it ever made its way into a court filing, it’s been seen by everybody in the world. So commenting on the terms of the obviously-not-confidential contract would be a breach of attorney-client confidentiality… how exactly?
Even if there was a sealing stipulation, breaking it still wouldn’t be breaking confidentiality. “The rules of professional responsibility prohibit the disclosure of ANY information relating to the representation”? Really? So by that logic, she couldn’t say “He’s happy with the outcome” without a waiver from Conan? Hell, she couldn’t say “I represent Conan” without a waiver from Conan? Moron.
- 13