This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Intellectual property rights may be established, protected, or granted to another party by contracts or agreements. Considering that the subject matter is so complex, the law regarding contracts is usually handled by lawyers who specialize in it.
Digital assets can be protected by IP and have always been capable of being licensed or assigned via a contract, or protected as a trade mark. There have also been complaints where creators have tried to NFT their own creativity but by doing so have breached a contract. The terms of ownership and remuneration vary between platforms.
The attention of this SpecialKat was recently drawn to the decision of the Nigerian Court of Appeal in Banire v NTA-Star TV Network Ltd regarding the question of authorship and ownership of copyright in photographs used for advertising purposes and the issue of image rights in Nigeria.
As a result, the sector works closely with various performers, artists, authors, publishers, production companies, record labels, online content providers, broadcasters, advertising, distributors, etc. Intellectual Property Ownership. Intellectual Property rights influence almost every aspect ofthis industry and its creative process.
Then, in May 2021, the fashion brand Rag & Bone advertised a new, officially-licensed Cruella -inspired collection—without Beavan’s knowledge or attribution. Licensing requires ownership of the designs, which calls into question who owns a costume—the costume designer or the production company who them?
There are open auctions, limited auctions, various flavors of ownership for the NFT, and sales of both digital and non-digital assets. An NFT is a Smart Contract, meaning that it embeds specific basic contract terms in the NFT metadata that goes onto the blockchain. Was that ownership transferred, and if so, to whom?
“Web3 cannot and should not be reduced to blockchain when the real shift is towards user ownership of digital assets… This definitional shift focuses attention on what assets can be legally owned and the meaning of ownership “rights,” more generally, in the emerging digital spaces of web3.”. . user ownership of digital assets)?
The next phase of blockchain technology is focussed on bringing such scarcity and uniqueness to the internet, allowing for the ownership and collection of unique digital assets. The current trend in internet law, has tended to elevate companies’ rights through contracts and licences while demoting owners to simple users. [1]
Roblox sued for copyright infringement, false advertising, trademark infringement, false association and false designation of origin, trade dress infringement, intentional interference with contractual relations, breach of contract, and false advertising and unfair competition under California law.
This is a case focusing on ownership of social media accounts. See “ Social Media Ownership Disputes Part II: Bridal Wear Company Takes Back Control of Instagram Account from Ex-Employee ” and “ Another Confused Entry in the Social Media Account Ownership Jurisprudence–JLM v. (See We blogged this case twice before.
It does so at the Rose Bowl Stadium under three contracts with Pasadena, including a Master License Agreement, Trademark Agreement, and Trademark Consent Agreement. There was no controversy as to whether Pasadena had an “ownership” interest in the relevant trademarks.
On 24 June 2022, BAYC sued Ryder Ripps, a conceptual artist and NFT creator for trade mark infringement, unfair competition, false advertising, cybersquatting and other cause of actions before the Central District of California. This is a U.S federal court which has jurisdiction in the case pursuant to Title 28 of the United States Code.
Since Roderique was unaware of the advertisement and was not doing work for The Bay, she tweeted the following: “ Hey @hudsonsbay, it would have been a good idea for you to get my permission to use my face and associated activism to solicit donations ‘to support employment and empowerment of IBPOC’, no? Roderique’s Response.
Amazon argued that “buy” didn’t mean perpetual ownership, and that it sufficiently disclosed the risk of losing access. Though the “buy” button manifests consent to a contract, “certain terms and policies could fail to meet statutory standards of clearness and effectiveness.” Buy” was also plausibly deceptive.
This exception allows a buyer to enforce non-compete agreements against a seller if the seller is an “owner of a business entity selling or otherwise disposing of all of his or her ownership interests in the business entity.”. 1) The sale of business exception applies even when the transferor holds ownership in the transferee.
BrandTotal “provides advertising consulting services to corporate clients regarding how those clients’ and their competitors’ digital advertisements are presented to social media users.” Law students, this is one of many reasons why your 1L Contracts class is so important. ” Oof.
This content is freely available and monetized through advertisements. “Defendant Kumar has made a claim of ownership of Plaintiff’s work and infringement by Plaintiff. First, he claims ownership over all of Plaintiff’s works via a contract that is, on information and belief, fraudulent.
TMRR conceived of a mortgage financing program that would be run by a Native American Tribe, and it contracted with the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah (CBC) to implement and operate the program. Under the MSA, TMRR is deemed CBC's "agent" and "contracted day-to-day operator." TMRR, LLC , Cancellation No. of Veterinary Sports Med.
This content is freely available and monetized through advertisements. “Defendant Kumar has made a claim of ownership of Plaintiff’s work and infringement by Plaintiff. First, he claims ownership over all of Plaintiff’s works via a contract that is, on information and belief, fraudulent.
Amongst other things, the Act also establishes a National Rights Registry (NRR ) , which is the central repository collating details pertaining to the ownership of various copyright works. The NRR allows copyright holders to register and view/download copyright certificates digitally.
This blog explores some considerations surrounding influencer marketing and highlights key aspects that should be addressed in contracts to ensure a mutually beneficial and legally compliant partnership. Parties : Consider the parties involved in the arrangement and ensure that the appropriate parties are reflected in any formal contracts.
Worse, it’s not clear the users have a “possessory interest” in those bits due to the possibility that copyright and contract law that may limit what users can do with those bits. Copyright and contract law that may restrict legally what the user may do with the “copies” that are now resident in the device RAM.
Risks for all stakeholders include FTC Part 255 regulations for endorsements and influencer contract drafting and, in this game, one of the things we’re going to be talking about is, you know, intellectual property. These are the contract terms that are the most obvious to all the stakeholders in the influencer-marketing game.
False advertising: Plaintiffs didn’t allege that Nobelle altered the merchandise in any way; “instead, the false statement arises from implication, from the fact that Nobelle is selling products that are not theirs to sell and, in the case of ‘The Line’ items, products it does not have the authority to sell.”
While the High Court found Morison liable for trademark infringement as well as passing-off, the trial judge did not make a finding of copyright infringement, stating that as the designer of the device was not called to testify, copyright ownership was not sufficiently proven. NTA-Star used photos of Banire on their billboards.
Wyndham Vacation Ownership, Inc. 20, 2021) In this timeshare exit false advertising litigation, the court excludes Wyndham’s expert. Timeshare exit entities like defendant TET used “online advertising and oral sales pitches to timeshare owners to convince them to sign up for TET’s service.” Wyndham Vacation Ownership, Inc.
This blog explores some considerations surrounding influencer marketing and highlights key aspects that should be addressed in contracts to ensure a mutually beneficial and legally compliant partnership. Parties : Consider the parties involved in the arrangement and ensure that the appropriate parties are reflected in any formal contracts.
The false advertising parts: Jeong alleged that Nexo advertised to consumers that it does not own users’ collateral (e.g., Clients retain 100% ownership of their digital assets. while acting otherwise—eventually invoking its ownership right over users’ collateral to justify liquidation of that collateral (e.g.
It’s not possible to “trespass” an intangible asset; any legal protection for the asset comes from contract law (but the plaintiffs gave a license) or IP law, such as copyright law, which the plaintiffs aren’t invoking. Implied-in-Law Contract/Unjust Enrichment. physical property), not intangibles.
DealMaker alleged that defendants stole its trade secrets and also alleged violation of state and federal false advertising law. Challenged claim: DealMaker’s customers do not retain ownership over their own data. Defendants offered examples of contracts that, they argued, had a fee structure of 8-10%.
The law does not apply to contracts covering confidential and proprietary information, protection of trade secrets, or inventions assignment agreements. Contract lawyers know that to be enforceable a promise must be supported by consideration. One-size-fits-all contracts always need fine-tuning. Mandatory Review. Consideration.
He also stated that he created Intellectual Property for the Defendants’ social media accounts, digital marketing, and other advertising vehicles. According to the Complaint, Schwartz began working for Kilroy’s as a server and bartender in August of 2021.
Montgomery & Newcomb LLC is objecting to a Florida federal judge's recommendation against blocking a lawsuit filed by timeshare developer Wyndham Vacation Ownership Inc. against the firm for deceptive advertising and breach of contract.
Defendants NGT and NGE advertised an ability to help customers terminate their timeshare contract or ownership; other defendants were part of the exit process. The advertising attempted to target timeshare owners (the target lists for mailers weren’t always accurate). One defendant was a law firm. Restrictions will apply.
In Nigeria, Airtel Nigeria Limited neglected to renew their contract with actor and filmmaker Adewole Ojo to use his photographs for advertisements. The defendant has used the plaintiff’s song in an advertisement without the plaintiff's consent. Katpost on the ruling here.
Where an individual or an entity attempts to infringe upon your IP assets or contests your ownership, he can offer valuable guidance and support throughout the evidence gathering and litigation process. Blockchain technology allows for a guarded and secured chain of evidence for IP ownership. The Use of Smart Contracts.
This case concerns major players in the world of professional polo, their efforts to produce and clone genetically superior horses, and the ownership disputes that have arisen from those efforts.” Allegedly, these statements, plus the use of the horses’ names as given by La Dolfina, constituted false advertising and false association.
Chiusa’s claims: willful copyright infringement; breach of the oral distribution agreement; trademark infringement, false advertising, trade dress/trade name infringement, and false designation of origin undre the Lanham Act; a Tennessee Consumer Protection Act claim; and conversion. There’s a similar copyright registration for this site.
3, 2022) Plaintiffs alleged that they employed the individual defendants in part to manage social media advertising and promotion for plaintiffs’ baking businesses, aka La Baguette. The law on the ownership of a social media pages created by employees for employers is evolving rapidly and varies between jurisdictions. DLB-21-401 (D.
Reading Time: 2 minutes Introduction One of the joys of home ownership is being able to modify and alter the structure, layout, and furnishings within your home. But what do you do if the renovation does not finish, or the work done is of worse quality than advertised? A contract can be implied, oral or written.
for unlawfully manufacturing, importing, advertising, marketing, selling, and distributing unauthorized, counterfeit versions of its popular CAKE brand of hemp-derived Delta-8 products. But the distribution right does not include “the mere transportation of goods without a transfer or sale of ownership interest in the goods.”
2024) The court of appeals affirmed the dismissal of FedEx’s false advertising claims (under the Lanham Act and Tennessee Consumer Protection Act), albeit on somewhat different grounds. Collectively they’re called “contracted service providers” (CSPs). Fedex Ground Package System, Inc. Route Consultant, Inc., 23-5456, F.4th
Some companies even use patents in their advertisements to project an innovative image to the public. The Ownership Dilemma In the realm of patents, it’s essential to differentiate between the inventor and the applicant, holder, or owner of the patent.
Particularly, it was argued that against the backdrop of the pandemic, the medicines produced were in high demand due to their characteristics of relieving some of the major symptoms exhibited by the patients who had contracted the Covid-19 virus. Merck Sharp and Dohme v. SMS Pharmaceuticals [Delhi High Court].
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content