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 2009, the Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC) mass-produced sweaters as part of their official merchandise for the 2010 Vancouver Olympics. It is likely that tattoos would fall under the Copyright Act under section 5(1), which delineates artisticworks as expressions through visual medium. Current State of the Law on Tattoo Designs.
In relation to ‘Parodies’, since it is derived from the original work of another writer or artist, it is difficult to draw a line between creative criticism and imitation. Vipul Amrutlal Shah (2009) and MRF Limited v. The Supreme Court’s decisions in the case of Shree Ventakesh Films (SVF) v.
It is here that the distinction between ‘design’ in the Designs Act and ‘artisticwork’ in the Copyright Act becomes relevant. This is evidenced as an artisticwork enjoys protection throughout the life of the author plus sixty years; whereas a design only enjoys protection for 10 years from registration.
[i] The very first accords to recognise why IPRs are important were the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1883) and the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and ArtisticWorks (1886). REFRENCES [i] Bajaj Auto Ltd vs. TVS Motor Company Limited 2009 [ii] Yahoo!, iv] Sameer Wadekar & Anr.
No strict actions are taken against these infringements; in fact, in a Supreme Court case in Japan in 2009 [1] the creator of file sharing program known as ‘Winny’ was not found guilty of infringing content through providing file-sharing software and his actual intent of legitimate legal use was considered over the alleged infringement.
A key issue identified by the Hearing Officer was the use of WONDER WOMAN as a trade mark and the comparisons that could be drawn between it being used as the title of an artisticwork.
The word “originality” is frequently used in conjunction with the creativity of writers, thinkers, and artists. The Copyright , Designs and Patents Act of 1988 in the United Kingdom specifies in Section (1)(1)(a) that copyright exists in “original literary, dramatic, musical, or artisticworks.” 1] [1916] 2 Ch 601. [2]
Copyright in the UK protects a closed list of works, which never conformed with the EU law’s open-ended approach, suggesting that copyright protection arises in respect of any work falling within the scope of Berne Convention and the InfoSoc directive , which is its “ author’s own intellectual creation ” (as confirmed in Infopaq in 2009).
For example, in 2009 the owner of a physical TASER gun sued Liden Lab stating that the users of Second Life are infringing the TASER’s trademark by creating a version of the TASER gun and trading them in Second Life. This right is given to literary and artisticwork like music, etc. Later it was settled. Copyright Infringement.
Countrywide Promoters Private Limited vs Navraj Infratech Private Limited on 19 September, 2024 (Delhi High Court) The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant for copyright infringement, passing off, and unfair trade practices regarding an architectural design, the “ArtisticWork/Device” created by Upton-Hansen Architects Ltd.
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