SpicyIP
JANUARY 23, 2022
Mukesh, 2006 13 SCC 197). “the business of issuing or granting licence in respect of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works incorporated in a cinematograph films or sound recordings shall be carried out only through a copyright society” ) has to be read as an exception to the first proviso. In Sodan Singh v.
The IPKat
NOVEMBER 20, 2022
Artistic works?) Oriakhogba also weighs in on the perennial issue of the classification of cultural heritage materials (are they expressions of folklore? Traditional cultural expressions? and the implications of any preferred classification.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
IP Whiteboard
AUGUST 30, 2020
In what we understand to be an industry-first, the Copyright Agency (an Australian not-for-profit collecting society that also licences copyright protected literary and artistic works) has licenced an Indigenous artwork for a tattoo. In looking at this question, you first need to consider what work is being used as a tattoo.
IP and Legal Filings
AUGUST 28, 2023
In India, it can be protected as a series mark as has been mentioned under Section 15 of the Trade marks Act 1999 as well as an ‘artistic work’ under the Copyrights Act 1957. Joy Creators, 2011 (45) PTC 541. [2] 2] Rintisch v. Eder (C-553/11). [3] 3] Louis Vuitton Malletier v. Dooney & Bourke, Inc., 3d 108 (2d Cir.
IP and Legal Filings
MARCH 28, 2024
1] The Copyright Act protects certain types of works, which are included in Section 13. 13 (1) states that original literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works as well as cinematograph films and sound recordings are protected by copyright. 20, 2023) [link] [10] Arbaaz Khan Production (P) Ltd. Northstar Entertainment (P) Ltd.,
Velocity of Content
JUNE 8, 2022
> “ Peter Pan in Scarlet ” (2006 novel by Geraldine McCaughrean). The dust jacket text refers to the centenary of the novel’s initial publication and the fact that the rightsholder – Great Ormond’s — opted to mark this occasion by authorizing this work, promoting it as “the first ever authorized sequel to J.M.
Kluwer Copyright Blog
JUNE 30, 2021
The performance of the song clip in the film was transformative, as it was held that the filmmaker had used the unaltered song as “raw material” to produce a work with undoubtedly “new aesthetics” (in this regard, the District Court had cited the 2006 Second Circuit’s precedent Blanch v.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
91 
Let's personalize your content