2017 Artistic Work Ownership 
IP and Legal Filings
APRIL 20, 2023
Introduction Any literally or artistic work that is original and creative i.e.; not copied from anywhere by the owner is protected under Copyright Act, 1957. Thus, most would agree that AI-created work does not have the component of originality. Issues There are many issues in granting ownership to AI.
IP and Legal Filings
JANUARY 24, 2023
Image Sources : Shutterstock] Copyrightability In Indian Context Copyright is a legal term used to describe the rights that creators have over their literary and artistic works. Hence, the trainer also has strong claims for ownership of AI. [10] 5] In USA, the court in the case of Fiest Publication Inc.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
IIPRD
APRIL 8, 2024
This article delves into the ongoing debate around the issue of right of ownership of copyright by AI generators for their novel artwork. There is a need to shed light on the legal status of AI which can help the courts determine whether they are eligible to ownership rights of copyright for their work or not. 5] Andersen v.
IP and Legal Filings
OCTOBER 19, 2022
Literary, dramatic, and artistic works are recognized as protected works under Thailand’s Copyright Act B.E. Apart from the copyright of an NFT’s underlying work, NFTs are also subject to property rights as stipulated under Section 37 of the Constitution of Thailand B.E. 2537 (1994). Conclusion.
Kluwer Copyright Blog
APRIL 17, 2024
In addition to raising questions about ownership of outputs , infringement in training , and the future of copyright as a policy tool to encourage creativity , economists are in the early stages of analysing the effects of these technologies on human creativity. The data provides some evidence for the hypothesis.
IP and Legal Filings
AUGUST 14, 2023
Since copyright is “universal”, some argue that the lex originis should be utilised to determine who owns works that have been plagiarised. Since copyright in whatever form (even first ownership) is subject to the territoriality principle, many argue that lex loci protectionis is the appropriate course of action. [10] Garimella and S.
SpicyIP
FEBRUARY 12, 2024
Read Yogesh’s critique of the judgement in light of DHC’s OpenTV decision and the CRI 2017 Guidelines. The Respondent operates his business through two incorporated entities and claims ownership of the trademark via the permitted use by the two incorporated entities.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
70 
Let's personalize your content