Technology & Marketing Law Blog
AUGUST 2, 2023
A new breed of artists is using generative artificial intelligence tools like DALL·E, Midjourney, Firefly, and ChatGPT to create artistic works. Do these creations belong to the artists or the public domain? Do creators who use generative AI maintain copyright in their creations? By guest blogger Prof. Oscar Wilde No.
IP Whiteboard
AUGUST 30, 2020
In what we understand to be an industry-first, the Copyright Agency (an Australian not-for-profit collecting society that also licences copyright protected literary and artistic works) has licenced an Indigenous artwork for a tattoo. In looking at this question, you first need to consider what work is being used as a tattoo.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Biswajit Sarkar Copyright Blog
DECEMBER 20, 2022
Photographs are under the subject matter of copyright which means that photographs are artistic works that attract copyright protection. In India, photographs enjoy copyright protection under Section 2 (c) i of the Copyright Act, 1957 , which mentions the certain types of artistic works granted copyright protection in India.
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. This question even after a broad reading of the Indian Copyright law remains unanswered, demanding an amendment in the present law or more clarity on the same by the way of judicial decisions.
IPilogue
NOVEMBER 17, 2021
Collective Ownership Over Cultural Artwork. Canadian courts have not yet grappled with the issue of collective ownership of Indigenous artwork. The applicant, Indigenous artist John Bulun Bulun, sought relief for copyright infringement of a bark painting, which R & T Textiles had used on t-shirts. Of note, in DRG Inc.
SpicyIP
DECEMBER 15, 2023
AI generated works are not works as such, rather they are the outcomes of maximizing the likelihood of the prompted text or pixel in the command. They can be explained as the software outcomes rather than expressions of intellectual creativity to present something in the digital form.
LexBlog IP
MARCH 9, 2023
They must first determine whether the work is one “of artistic expression” and thus prima facie entitled to protection under the First Amendment. If it is, the Court will then ask whether the use of the trademark bears any artistic relevance to the underlying work. ” ( Hermès Int’l v. .”
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
96 
Let's personalize your content