IP and Legal Filings
JUNE 29, 2024
Certain sections like 2(qq) and 38, define a “performer” and specify whether a person’s personality falls under the definition of a performer, under which a performer’s right may be asserted, hence prohibiting the unapproved marketing of a performer’s work. Ammini Amma and Ors.,
JIPL Online
APRIL 9, 2021
On one hand, those who view intellectual property rights as a limited monopoly would suggest that even derivative use of the content in a meme is infringement on the rights holder’s interest. Keller, Recognizing the Derivative Works Right as a Moral Right: A Case Comparison and Proposal , 63 Case W.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Kluwer Copyright Blog
SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejected Jeff Koons’ fair use argument ( section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976 ) based on parody ( Rogers v. Moulinsart, the Belgian company that holds the rights to Tintin, and the heir of the author, Hergé, holder of the moral rights, brought a copyright infringement case against Marabout.
IP and Legal Filings
JANUARY 22, 2024
The crux of this debate is the argument that if the theft of restricted digital content is for the purpose of knowledge and research, it should be considered as an act done under ‘fair use’ and ‘fair dealing’ of the content. Digital Rights Management & Fair Use If everything is so well designed, then where is the issue?
LexBlog IP
AUGUST 31, 2022
ii) For Laughs : Real Infringement Cases Impacted, In The US and Elsewhere, By Claims To Humor To Show Fair Use Or Non-Confusion. ” Many of these issues on the trademark side could be addressed in the Jack Daniels matter if the US Supreme Court grants cert. Eleonora Rosati, “Just a laughing matter?
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
82 
Let's personalize your content