Copyright Lately

MAY 6, 2022

For that, you’d need an assignment or license from the owner of the underlying copyright. The same rule applies to digital artworks sold as NFTs. Want to Create New Derivative Works? You Should Probably Read The License. What you can’t do is make your own “Dune” movie.

Derivative Work 94

Derivative Work Licensing Artwork Contracts 94

TorrentFreak

JULY 28, 2021

The plaintiffs believe that Ring-1 or those acting in concert with them fraudulently obtained access to the games’ software clients before disassembling, decompiling and/or creating derivative works from them. 1201(a)(2)).

Copyright Infringement 141

Copyright Infringement Copyright Derivative Work Social Media 141

Kluwer Copyright Blog

JUNE 19, 2023

Specifically, a group called Spice DAO purchased an NFT displaying a copy of filmmaker Alejandro Jodorowsky’s ‘Dune’ for $3 million, assuming it would grant them the ability to produce derivative works, such as an animated Dune series.

Non-Fungible Tokens 98

Non-Fungible Tokens IP Ownership Contracts 98

Kluwer Copyright Blog

JULY 24, 2024

Is it a proper copyright ownership or an assigned license? If output works infringe copyright, who is responsible (e.g. In almost every model studied, ownership of outputs was assigned to the user, but in many cases, an extensive license was also granted back to the model provider for coexisting use of the outputs.

Copyright 135

Copyright Ownership Social Media Licensing 135

The IPKat

JUNE 27, 2022

A digital file (an artwork, a song, etc.), While major projects (like BAYC) deploy their own tailor-made smart contract directly in the blockchain, most NFTs are created through the proprietary smart contract of platforms like OpenSea or Foundation. These digital files are freely downloadable by everyone (there is no DRM protection in NFTs).

Non-Fungible Tokens 135

Non-Fungible Tokens Contracts Copying Art 135

LexBlog IP

MAY 19, 2023

Clarifying Copyright Fair Use in Commercialized and Licensed Visual Arts: Insights from Warhol v. Goldsmith by Jaime Chandra Clarifying Fair Use in Commercialized & Licensed Visual Arts: Insights from the Warhol v. We’re talking about Andy Warhol Foundation for Visual Arts, Inc. Table of Contents: Warhol v.

Fair Use 40

Fair Use Art Licensing Derivative Work 40

IP Tech Blog

JUNE 2, 2023

The Supreme Court recently upheld an appellate court’s ruling that Andy Warhol’s use of a photograph of Prince as a reference for a collection of screen prints is not fair use – to the extent his foundation decided to license them at least. Goldsmith et al, Case No. Unbeknownst to Ms. Goldsmith, Andy Warhol not only used Ms.

Fair Use 57

Fair Use Derivative Work Copying Licensing 57

The IPKat

JANUARY 18, 2023

In particular, it stands out a concept which is frequently neglected when NFTs are explained: the link to the image, i.e., the artwork, is not contained in the smart contract (the piece of software written in Solidity programming language which generates an NFT) but in a JSON file (“JavaScript Object Notation”) which contains the NFT’s metadata.

Artwork 83

Artwork Contracts Art False Advertising 83

LexBlog IP

MAY 25, 2023

The decision affirms a previous ruling by the Second Circuit, which found that Warhol’s artwork shared the same commercial purpose as the original photograph taken by photographer Lynn Goldsmith. The Andy Warhol Foundation contended that the artworks were transformative and gave new meaning to Goldsmith’s photo.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Derivative Work Artwork Copyright Law 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 5, 2023

2] The Court’s decision affirmed the ruling of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that the Warhol work was derivative of the original, and noted that “the new expression may be relevant to whether a copying use has a sufficiently distinct purpose or character” but that factor was not dispositive by itself. [3]

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Licensing Cease and Desist Derivative Work 52

LexBlog IP

MAY 26, 2023

2] The Court’s decision affirmed the ruling of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that the Warhol work was derivative of the original, and noted that “the new expression may be relevant to whether a copying use has a sufficiently distinct purpose or character” but that factor was not dispositive by itself. [3]

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Licensing Cease and Desist Derivative Work 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 2, 2023

The Supreme Court recently upheld an appellate court’s ruling that Andy Warhol’s use of a photograph of Prince as a reference for a collection of screen prints is not fair use – to the extent his foundation decided to license them at least. Goldsmith et al, Case No. ” Unbeknownst to Ms.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Derivative Work Copying Licensing 52

Copyright Lately

AUGUST 25, 2023

Howell ruled last Friday that the Register of Copyrights did not act “arbitrarily or capriciously” in denying a copyright registration to Dr. Stephen Thaler for artwork generated entirely by artificial intelligence. ” Dr. Importantly, however, there will still be no copyright protection in the AI-generated material itself.

Derivative Work 87

Derivative Work Registration Copyright Public Domain 87

LexBlog IP

MAY 19, 2023

On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court found that artistic changes to a pre-existing work, alone, not necessarily sufficient to make a derivative work fair use. Applying a new lens on how to view the purpose of a derivative work under U.S. copyright law.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Derivative Work Copyright Law Art 52

Kluwer Copyright Blog

AUGUST 7, 2023

In 1984, Condé Nast, the publisher, obtained a license from Goldsmith to allow Andy Warhol to use her Prince portrait as the foundation for a single serigraphy to be featured in Vanity Fair magazine. In 2016, Condé Nast acquired a license from the Warhol Foundation to use the Prince Series as illustrations for a new magazine.

Copyright 52

Copyright Derivative Work Fair Use Copyright Law 52

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. And then further questions like if given protection under IPR, will that be fair to the initial creators, whose works were used without consent or licensing to create these so-called novel art pieces?

Art 52

Art Artwork Intellectual Property Copyright Law 52

Intepat

MAY 17, 2024

This is because the resulting work is a new creation that depends on various factors, including the system’s programming and the input prompt. The generated work might be an original creation of the AI, or it could be considered a derivative work depending on the nature of the output and the input data used.

Ownership 52

Ownership Contracts Confidentiality Copyright 52

Kluwer Copyright Blog

JULY 16, 2023

.” 3) How to Distinguish Transformative Fair Uses From Infringing Derivative Works? Vanity Fair magazine had commissioned Warhol’s artwork in 1984 to accompany an article about the singer’s rise to fame based on Goldsmith’s photograph under a one-time-use “artist reference” license between Vanity Fair and Goldsmith’s agent.

Blogging 52

Blogging Law IP Fair Use 52

Kluwer Copyright Blog

MAY 9, 2023

Does such an output infringe on a copyrighted work of a third party, especially those works “ingested” during the training stage of the AI system? Under US law, is the output a “ derivative work ” of the “ingested” copyrighted works? There is disagreement among commentators whether this is a desirable development.

Copyright 138

Copyright Copyright Law Fair Use Law 138

LexBlog IP

APRIL 13, 2022

On August 6, Roc-A-Fella filed an amended complaint, naming GoDigital, a company to which Dash allegedly granted the right to license Reasonable Doubt to certain websites, as a co-defendant. [13] According to Miramax, the creation of the NFTs constituted copyright infringement because they were unauthorized derivative works of Pulp Fiction.

Non-Fungible Tokens 52

Non-Fungible Tokens Social Media Contracts Branding 52

Kluwer Copyright Blog

JUNE 5, 2023

Vanity Fair magazine had commissioned Warhol’s artwork in 1984 to accompany an article about the singer’s rise to fame based on Goldsmith’s photograph under a one-time-use “artist reference” license between Vanity Fair and Goldsmith’s agent. However, such uses must be licensed or be held unfair.

Derivative Work 93

Derivative Work Fair Use Licensing Art 93

Copyright Lately

MAY 22, 2023

In a 7-2 decision , the Court ruled that the commercial licensing of Andy Warhol’s “Orange Prince” to Condé Nast to illustrate a story about the late musician shared “substantially the same purpose” as the original Lynn Goldsmith photo from which Warhol’s silkscreen was derived, and therefore weighed against fair use.

Fair Use 98

Fair Use Licensing Copying Artwork 98

IP Tech Blog

JANUARY 4, 2023

Given that NFTs are the result of digital work that is transported in images, videos, photography and other forms of digital media, copyright seems to be the closest IP right to protect both the source code of the digital work, as well as its derivative works. Is this the same in the US and China? The United States.

IP 109

IP Ownership Non-Fungible Tokens Copyright Law 109

Copyright Lately

SEPTEMBER 12, 2022

One of Deadly Doll’s popular designs is a cartoon image of a bikini-clad pin-up girl holding a skull: Deadly Doll’s original artwork. Deadly Doll has applied versions of its artwork to various products, including tops and sweatpants: Deadly Doll’s artwork as reproduced on useful articles.

Copyright 105

Copyright Derivative Work Artwork Fair Use 105

LexBlog IP

MAY 19, 2023

In 1984, Vanity Fair sought to license the photograph for an “artist reference” in a story about the musician. Goldsmith agreed to license a one-time use of the photograph with full attribution. scholarship, or research” [2] and is evaluated through multiple factors.

Licensing 52

Licensing Fair Use Copyright Derivative Work 52

LexBlog IP

JULY 7, 2023

Supreme Court affirmed the Second Circuit Court of Appeals’ holding that the Andy Warhol Foundation’s licensing of Warhol’s Orange Prince , a print based on a photograph of the late musician by defendant Lynn Goldsmith, did not constitute fair use of the Goldsmith photograph. [3] 2] A week later, the U.S. 3] Graham v.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Art Licensing Copyright Infringement 52

LexBlog IP

JANUARY 4, 2023

Given that NFTs are the result of digital work that is transported in images, videos, photography and other forms of digital media, copyright seems to be the closest IP right to protect both the source code of the digital work, as well as its derivative works. Is this the same in the US and China? The United States.

IP 52

IP Ownership Non-Fungible Tokens Copyright Law 52

43(B)log

AUGUST 9, 2024

seems like this is going to have trouble with derivative works] Amanda Levendowski, Fairer Public Benefit Bias and harms of works aren’t taken into account in fair use analysis: recruits a legal tool typically aimed at one set of problems for the purpose of cleverly addressing a different set of problems. Hardest case.

Fair Use 59

Fair Use Marketing Marketing Licensing 59

Patently-O

OCTOBER 11, 2022

Warhol’s Estate argues that the artworks represent a commentary on the dehumanizing nature of celebrity whereas the Goldsmith photos merely reflect Prince in his unique human form. Rather, Warhol worked from a set of studio photographs by famed celebrity photographer Lynn Goldsmith. Warhol was never personally a party to the license).

Fair Use 134

Fair Use Copyright Derivative Work Art 134

43(B)log

FEBRUARY 2, 2024

Goldsmith SCOTUS understood the “use” to be the foundation’s commercial licensing. But licensing is neither a © use nor an act of infringement. DJ sought declaratory judgment that Prince Series as such was transformative, grounded in the artwork itself; a static claim w/o regard to specific use or purpose.

Fair Use 49

Fair Use Derivative Work Licensing Marketing 49