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
After the 2015 transaction between the team and the league closed, the team was sued by a third party who claimed that the Gull logo infringed his artwork entitled “San Diego Gulls”. A logo is a graphicdesign and that has copyright elements.
The team spent about $750,000 defending the copyrightinfringement lawsuit and ultimately settled with the plaintiff for $330,000. A logo is a graphicdesign and that has copyright elements. There are a few takeaways from this case.
The first view is more closely aligned with traditional copyright law, and the court is likely to view that standard as applicable to NFTs and copyright law. If the other opinion becomes the standard, whoever mints the artwork first will be the copyright owner and the artist could be at risk of losing their artwork in NFT form.
Indeed, in a world where “ nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed “, it is a rather daunting exercise for any court to draw the line between inspiration and imitation in copyrighted works, let alone in copyrighted art works.
Indeed, in a world where “ nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed “, it is a rather daunting exercise for any court to draw the line between inspiration and imitation in copyrighted works, let alone in copyrighted art works.
The first view is more closely aligned with traditional copyright law, and the court is likely to view that standard as applicable to NFTs and copyright law. If the other opinion becomes the standard, whoever mints the artwork first will be the copyright owner and the artist could be at risk of losing their artwork in NFT form.
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