2016 Advertising Copyright Infringement Fair Use 
Copyright Lately
AUGUST 14, 2023
Goldsmith on a first-of-its-kind copyright infringement lawsuit involving celebrity tattoo artist Katherine Von Drachenberg (aka Kat Von D). Fischer denied both parties’ motions for summary judgment, finding triable issues of substantial similarity and fair use. Fifteen minutes of fame, meet permanent ink.
LexBlog IP
FEBRUARY 28, 2022
1] That decision shook the art world, as it seems to dramatically narrow the scope of the fair use doctrine, and raises doubts about the lawfulness of many existing works. [2] Goldsmith counterclaimed for copyright infringement. It found that all four fair use factors weighed against fair use. [12]
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
IPilogue
SEPTEMBER 29, 2021
Goldsmith said she was not aware of Warhol’s work until Tribute magazine featured the image, without crediting her, when Prince passed away in 2016. The legal question at the center of the dispute is whether Warhol’s series is fair use of Goldsmith’s original photograph. The trial judge John G.
JIPL Online
APRIL 9, 2021
In particular, it explores why copyright of a meme’s underlying content does not matter in a normative sense. In this blog I argue that copyright protection of the content underlying memes does not matter because of the relative weakness of enforcement mechanisms for copyright infringement of this scale. 139 (2016). [ix]
Intepat
JULY 11, 2024
Introduction The issue came to light when one of the founders of a company named Dorje Teas put up a post on LinkedIn claiming that they have been served a copyright infringement notice by Shark Tank India for the unauthorized use of clips of their pitch on the show to advertise on Youtube and Meta ads.
Kashishipr
JUNE 9, 2021
If the music that is streamed is not licensed out, then does it amount to Copyright Infringement ? The services are advertised on the idea that customers can store the files for offline usage, and that is a unique selling point of the service, and it thus is not incidental.
SpicyIP
AUGUST 4, 2024
Novex Communications Private Limited vs Siddhivinayak Hospitality on 29 July 2024 (Bombay High Court) Image from here An ad-interim relief was granted by the Court in a copyright infringement case instituted by the plaintiff. The plaintiff company owned the copyright of several films and these were not licensed to any party.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
88 
Let's personalize your content