Remove 2011 Remove Contracts Remove Ownership
article thumbnail

California Court of Appeal Enforces Non-Solicitation of Customers Provision in Joint Venture Transaction Involving Key Employee

Trading Secrets

This exception allows a buyer to enforce non-compete agreements against a seller if the seller is an “owner of a business entity selling or otherwise disposing of all of his or her ownership interests in the business entity.”. The joint venture was formalized over a five-day period in April 2011. In Blue Mountain Enterprises, LLC v.

article thumbnail

Comprehending Broadcasting Contracts and Intellectual Property Law at Crossroads

IIPRD

Hence, commercialization occurs by distributing contracts among the authors and directors/publishers to distribute their works. Like any contract, a broadcasting agreement is entered between the concerned parties ascertaining their rights and obligations with respect to their content as a document enforceable in the eyes of law.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Courts Still Have No Clue How to Determine Who Owns Social Media Accounts–JLM v. Gutman

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Gutman created a Pinterest account in 2011 and an Instagram account in 2012, shortly after she began working for JLM. However, the appellate court seems to invalidate that six-factor test: “Determining he ownership of social-media accounts is indeed a relatively novel exercise, but that novelty does not warrant a new six-factor test.”

article thumbnail

Introducing a zero-embargo Secondary Publication Right in Bulgaria

Kluwer Copyright Blog

Typically, in the case of scholarly publications, authors are publicly funded through payment under a standing contract with a university or research institute, or through project funding, including EU funding. Copyright in a work made for hire resides in the author of the work, unless the commission contract provides otherwise.

article thumbnail

Copyright Laws and Fair Dealing: Analysing the Ongoing Dispute Between Dhanush And Nayanthara

IP and Legal Filings

ANALYSIS OF THE DISPUTE According to the Indian Copyright Act of 1957, copyright ownership is contingent upon the nature of any agreements or the footage in place. It is seen that Dhanush, via the agreed contract, was the owner of all the BTS footage and had warned Nayanthara against its use. Yashraj Films (P) Ltd.,

article thumbnail

Well-known Cases Proving the Importance of Intellectual Property Rights – part 3

CopyrightsWorld

This article is part of our series showcasing well-known copyright ownership cases from the music and film industries, technology, and more. This week’s post looks at three well-known copyright infringement cases involving tech giants battling each other over ownership rights. Apple vs. Microsoft. However, Windows 2.0

article thumbnail

Music to Many Ears! Bombay High Court Passes a Landmark Order Recognizing the Right to Receive Royalties by Authors of Underlying Works

SpicyIP

The Proviso added to Section 17 prescribes that the rights of an author of original literary, dramatic, and musical work will be unaffected by the Producer’s ownership of the copyright in a cinematographic film and ownership of the employer on the work made under a contract of employment. 2011) (see here for Prof.

Music 98