Remove 2015 Remove Moral Rights Remove Ownership
article thumbnail

The Modern Copyright Dilemma: Digital Content Ownership and Access

IP and Legal Filings

This section also lacks in taking intention of the user ruining the watermarks, because sometimes there can be a situation where any person might end up ruining digital watermarks without intending to (Chakraverty, 2015). First, economic rights, which allow the owner of rights to derive a financial reward from the use of his works by others.

article thumbnail

Personality Rights In India : A Statutory And Judicial Analysis

IP and Legal Filings

Protection Of Personality Rights Under Ipr Although the provisions of the country’s current IPR laws can be used as an indirect reference, the law dealing to such a violation of image rights has not received exclusive recognition under Indian 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

Book review: Performers' Rights

The IPKat

Recognising the challenges for performers in the position and enforcement of their rights, the book also includes discussion on other forms of protections and remedies for performers, such as moral rights, contracts, passing off and copyright infringement.

article thumbnail

Canadian Perspectives on Artist Resale Rights

IPilogue

In its October 2015 policy proposition , CARFAC also highlighted the reality that many artists living in isolated northern communities live in impoverished conditions, while their work dramatically appreciates in value. Exercising control of downstream purchaser actions for traditional or non-digital artistic mediums is more complicated.

Art 105
article thumbnail

[Guest post] Could your beliefs about copyright be protected under the Equality Act?

The IPKat

In 2015 she commenced work at Mulberry as a Market Support Assistant. For example, IP academics might hold a belief in the right to own the copyright and moral rights of their own creative works and output, which may conflict with their University’s position on the ownership of lecture recordings.