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
Copyright Licensing of Digital Assets Attached to NFT Sales. Bonus: Free Open Source Copyright License for NFT sales below]. What are the terms by which you are selling the NFT and licensing your work, the art you put into the platform that’s going to be attached to the NFT? NFT Copyright Licensing.
Then, in May 2021, the fashion brand Rag & Bone advertised a new, officially-licensed Cruella -inspired collection—without Beavan’s knowledge or attribution. In 2020, a licensed Harley Quinn-inspired Birds of Prey collection by Her Universe did not involve the film’s costume designer, Erin Benach.
Businesses own valuable trademarks, which, once registered, can be licensed out. The rights that flow from a trademark can be licensed to others to receive royalties for commercialization. Licensing your trademark can be a beneficial business strategy that can not only strengthen the brand but also allow for expansion into new markets.
15, 2024) This putative class action alleged that Amazon overcharged and “[d]eceived consumers by misrepresenting that it was selling them Digital Content when, in fact, it was really only licensing it to them[.]” The court disagreed: there’s a plausible difference in value between owning outright versus purchasing a revocable license.
Introduction Shutterstock is a global provider of licensed images, videos, audio and editing tools, that has revolutionized the way visual content can be accessed and used. Content creators contribute their work to the platform, making it available for licensing, while end users can easily browse, license and utilize them.
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. Image of camera: Unsplash.
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. For example, the owners of the famous “ Grumpy Cat ” meme licensed the use of the name, image and likeness of the cat – and successfully enforced these rights.
New creations implicate IP issues, including the protection of what is created, potential infringement of preexisting IP, and ownership and licensing issues of the output. How must the compliance obligations of open source licenses be met in this context and by whom (developer or user)? Both the U.S.
The value of a business is now closely tied to its IP assets, which can be licensed, transferred, or used as capital in a joint venture. It is crucial in establishing a transparent record of ownership and transfer, while also safeguarding the rights of all parties involved in the transaction.
These various brands have posted laudatory posts congratulating her for this achievement, while at the same time utilizing her image and Olympic win for their own commercial own use by using it in the form of an advertisement. Now the pertinent question becomes whether the advertisements in question are prohibited under the law.
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 concepts of ownership and licensing are relevant in this context. Licensing and ownership: What’s the catch?
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.
The complaint alleged that Kokoa TV provided access to Korean-based TV shows and movies, including those exclusively licensed to wA for distribution in the United States. Kocowa holds an exclusive license to distribute around 1,100 shows in the United States, content created by the three major Korean networks. filed its complaint.
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.
That means there’s a copyright, and someone will own that copyright , and the person who is going to use it or distribute it or otherwise is going to have to have some license — license means permission- – for that copyright. The Difference Between An Endorsement & A License.
Courts in the Fifth Circuit consider: (1) the type of mark allegedly infringed; (2) the similarity between the two marks; (3) the similarity of the products or services; (4) the identity of retail outlets and purchasers; (5) the identity of the advertising media used; (6) the defendant’s intent; and (7) actual confusion.
This judgment concerned the classification of payments under end-user license agreements (EULA). In this judgment, the Delhi High Court delved into the interpretation of section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with respect to disputes involving trademark licensing agreements. CIT [Supreme Court].
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.
Plaintiffs want and expect Google to copy and display their websites in Chrome browser and Search App, and acknowledge that Google has license to do so.” We need to know more about this license. It seems like this license could be dispositive to the case, but the court doesn’t explore it more. ” Wait, what?
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.
On the other side, the university argued that Rameshwari Photocopy Services was granted a license to operate a photocopy shop on its campus in order to allow students to photocopy for educational and research purposes. The example of the application of this model is the way Jstor works.
This content is freely available and monetized through advertisements. “The GoodPorn Website is a pirate website, displaying copyrighted adult entertainment content without authorization or license,” the complaint alleged. However, there is one particular threat to this lucrative business model: pirate sites.
To settle that dispute, the parties worked out an “exclusive” license: the second-comer could sell the design on Amazon, and the registrant could keep selling it on eBay. The second comer/licensee assigned the exclusive license to a successor licensee, the defendant in this case. assertions.
January: The year kicked off in Tanzania with the news that the Parliamentary Standing Committee in Tanzania received a report from the Ministry of Culture, Arts and Sports addressing its efforts to review and improve the loopholes found in the Copyright Licensing and Rights to Benefit from Re-Sale Regulations, 2022.
PPL, claiming ownership over public performance rights via assignments from music labels, alleged infringement after its representatives discovered unlicensed use of its repertoire. The plaintiff submitted that it was the owner of the mark and later by assignment and then by seeking a license it is now a permitted user of the mark.
This content is freely available and monetized through advertisements. “The GoodPorn Website is a pirate website, displaying copyrighted adult entertainment content without authorization or license,” the complaint alleged. However, there is one particular threat to this lucrative business model: pirate sites.
The gaming and metaverse platform Roblox helped Gucci develop a variety of immersive themed locations that were inspired by the brand’s various advertising campaigns. For undisputed ownership of virtual designs, Intellectual Property (IP) laws must be thoroughly handled with.
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.
This court answers yes, though limits the effect of that by applying what looks like ordinary false advertising analysis. Through a licensing agreement, Hilti also markets and sells the Firestop Box Insert based in part on that same patent. . §43(a)(1)(A) And literally false statements presumptively cause competitors harm.”
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.” The defendant was initially given “complete and exclusive licensing rights in and to [the selected mares] and all cloned foals.”
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. DealMaker noted that Issuance’s own terms include a provision that allows Issuance to license its data.
Clear Disclosure : In the UK, the Advertising Standards Authority (the ASA) and the Competition and Markets Authority (the CMA) regulate influencer marketing by requiring compliance with the CAP Code and consumer protection law. A brand should also obtain waiver of moral rights from the influencer.
Eventually, instead of monthly compensation, Von Berg offered Hawrych a 10% ownership interest in Nutra-Luxe, which worked for 16 years. into the company name, added the phrase ‘physician developed/formulated’ to the product descriptions, and used Dr. Hawrych’s name, likeness, and trademark (‘Hawrych MD’) in various advertisements.”
I recently joined BakerHostetler’s Chicago office in the Digital Assets and Data Management Practice Group after spending almost eight years at Publicis Groupe, where I led a team of attorneys supporting business units focused on media, data and advertising technology (“ad tech”). Ad tech helps advertisers do exactly that.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that California Civil Code section 980(a)(2) , which grants “exclusive ownership” of a sound recording fixed before February 15, 1972, to its “author,” provides only an exclusive right of reproduction and distribution, and does not provide an exclusive right of public performance.
“Regardless of which device is used to access digital content, or which ‘iTunes’ app is used to buy or rent the digital content, the app provides a tab or folder labeled ‘purchased.’ ” But when third parties terminate their licensing agreements with Apple, Apple “must revoke [a] consumer[’s] access” to purchased digital content “without warning.”
” Domain names are also intangible, as are the records documenting domain name ownership, yet the court held they were capable of being converted. I guarantee that copyright owners will quote this statement to improperly assert ownership over uncopyrightable components of their “commercial websites.”
False advertising: Sybersound Recs., 2008), held that misrepresentations about copyright licensing status did not relate to the “nature, characteristics, and quality” of a good under §43(a)(1)(B), unlike “the visual and audio quality of the good.” Copyright ownership information is CMI. 3d 1137 (9th Cir.
Patents enable the establishment of a strong market presence and revenue generation through licensing as well. Furthermore, patent holders can generate income through licensing their inventions, whether through lump-sum payments or royalties. Cross-licensing agreements also enable access to external technology.
Clear Disclosure : In the UK, the Advertising Standards Authority (the ASA) and the Competition and Markets Authority (the CMA) regulate influencer marketing by requiring compliance with the CAP Code and consumer protection law. A brand should also obtain waiver of moral rights from the influencer.
Algthough Logan published the photos on Wikimedia under a Creative Commons license, he alleged that Meta stripped the photos of all identifying information and falsely identified itself as the owner by displaying its “copyright tag on the bottom of each Facebook user page,” breaching the license. 3d 1137 (9th Cir. Baden Sports, Inc.
If you’re using an online logo generator, such as the one in Canva, a very popular online program for creating all kinds of visual projects, or Logo.com, you need to look at the license terms of the software. Canva and other logo generators are licensing the use of their product and the generated logos in it to you.
What makes Astley’s case interesting is that Gravy and his record label obtained the appropriate copyright license to recreate the melody and lyrics from “Never Gonna Give You Up” (which Astley didn’t write and doesn’t control) for “Betty (Get Money).” The defendants obtained a license to use the former, but not the latter.
WPI counterclaimed against Restellini and third-party Institut Restellini SAS – Documentation Centre alleging copyright infringement and false advertising. In 2017, WI granted WPI an automatically renewable, exclusive license to use and exploit the content of all of WI’s materials, including the Modigliani material.
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