Remove 2017 Remove Artistic Work Remove Derivative Work
article thumbnail

When is a derivative work original and thus protectable by copyright? Classicist’s critical edition makes its way to Luxembourg in fresh Romanian CJEU referral

The IPKat

Translated into copyright language: a critical edition is an example of derivative work. In 2017, the Regional Court of Bucharest held that the defendants had infringed the professor’s moral right of attribution. Despite (or rather because of ?) In my view, this is so even for reasons beyond the question of originality.

article thumbnail

U.S. Supreme Court Vindicates Photographer But Destabilizes Fair Use — Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Legal Background: Copyright and Derivative Works Copyright law protects original works of authorship, including “pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works,” 17 U.S.C. For obvious reasons, the copyright in a photograph does not include the right to publicly perform the copyrighted work.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Prince, Prince, Prints: Will the Supreme Court Revisit Fair Use?

LexBlog IP

In 2017, the Warhol Foundation sued Goldsmith and her agency for a declaratory judgment that the Prince Series works are non-infringing or, in the alternative, that they constitute a fair use of the Prince Photograph. It found that all four fair use factors weighed against fair use. [12]

article thumbnail

The Interplay of Personality Rights and Freedom of Expression- the Jackie Shroff’s Case’

IP and Legal Filings

The status of the right to privacy as a fundamental right was established with the Puttaswamy judgment in the year 2017 [2] , due to which the development of the right to publicity as an aspect of the right to privacy in India is at the nascent stage. It usually entails review, commentary, satire, comedy, criticism over the original work.

article thumbnail

AI Generated Art and its conflict with IPR

IIPRD

Stability AI, three artists filed a claim on the basis that their work was used by the AI to train the algorithm and use them in a transformative manner to create new work. [5] Creator’s will need to keep an eye out to monitor such generators in case work derived from theirs appears. 5] Andersen v.

Art 52