This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In India, protection under copyrights is provided into two forms, which includes, economic rights and the moralrights of the author. Economic rights are enumerated under section 14 of the Act and section 57 deals with the moralrights of the copyright holder. Devices like- Computers, TVs, Watches etc.
The third defendant was licensed to produce and market the disputed foods and spices under its own name and at its own expense, paying a fixed fee to the plaintiff for each individual product sold. It held that taste cannot be characterised as a “work” under directive 2001/29 (DEC C- 310/2017 in T N P LAW). Emphasis added.)
on 17 July, 2023 (Commercial Court Bengaluru) Image from here The suit was filed by the plaintiff seeking directions from the court to take down the trailer of the cinematograph film “Hostel Hudgaru Bekagiddare” alleging violation of her personality and moralrights.
Moulinsart, the Belgian company that holds the rights to Tintin, and the heir of the author, Hergé, holder of the moralrights, brought a copyright infringement case against Marabout. Unlike in the Koons cases, the court found that Marabout could rely on the exception for parody. The parody defence.
Section 95a UrhG stipulates that technical measures employed for the protection of a copyrighted work or protected subject matter may not be circumvented without the authorisation of the rightholder, Section 95a UrhG being the transposition into German law of Article 6 of the InfoSoc Directive (2001/29).
Why the CJEU decision in Deckmyn is broader than parody”(2015) 52(2) Common Market Review 511, 518 (2015)]. ” Although the CJEU never mentioned the phrase ‘moralrights’ in its ruling, paragraph 31 might be read as referring to them.”). Eleonora Rosati, “Just a laughing matter? ”).
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content