2008 Artwork Brands 
Plagiarism Today
OCTOBER 26, 2021
Though an argument can be made that the company is already causing confusion by selling such a similar costume (Disney made this argument in 2008 when it sued and later settled with a costume company selling costumes similar to Disney characters), it would be considerably worse if they used the name Beetlejuice. Bottom Line.
Kluwer Copyright Blog
APRIL 22, 2024
This first duel has ended in a victory for the NFTs, at least for now. “Oiseau volant vers le soleil” by Joan Miró displayed in Mango stores, together with the NFT “The rainbow wears Mango” based on such painting. VEGAP has announced that it has appealed this judgment.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
IP and Legal Filings
SEPTEMBER 20, 2023
The Trademarks Act 1999- The Act intends on protecting the name of the brand by registering the trade name of the brand, hence eliminating the possibility of any other person using it without facing consequences. Visibly, the most imitated brands around the world are Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Chanel, Michael Kors, Coach, Nike, Rolex etc.
IP Tech Blog
JANUARY 4, 2023
In turn, this attracts interest from businesses ranging from fashion and sports brands, sport teams, designers, game developers, and other content owners. If the other opinion becomes the standard, whoever mints the artwork first will be the copyright owner and the artist could be at risk of losing their artwork in NFT form.
LexBlog IP
APRIL 15, 2022
When Christie’s Auction House first entered the secondary art market of mainland China in 2005, it licensed its brand to a local auction house and received a total of RMB 97,000,000 (roughly $12,100,000) for its inaugural sale. [1] Challenges: exchange control and tax. 22] The tariff rate sometime would also be affected by geopolitics.
LexBlog IP
JULY 5, 2022
Just as every piece of artwork is unique, there is no “one size fits all” when it comes to protecting your fashion goods with intellectual property tools. § 102(a); see also Pride Family Brands, Inc. Turner Heritage Homes Inc., 3d 1314, 1320 (11th Cir. 7] Hamil America, Inc. GFI , 193 F.3d 3d 92, 108 (2d Cir.
LexBlog IP
JANUARY 4, 2023
In turn, this attracts interest from businesses ranging from fashion and sports brands, sport teams, designers, game developers, and other content owners. If the other opinion becomes the standard, whoever mints the artwork first will be the copyright owner and the artist could be at risk of losing their artwork in NFT form.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
279 
Let's personalize your content