Remove Artwork Remove Designs Remove Public Domain Remove Reference
article thumbnail

Jean Paul Gaultier, Birth Your Own Venus

IPilogue

Following this designation , objects require authorization and a licence fee to be used commercially by third parties regardless of whether the work is in the public domain. The public domain refers to works not protected by copyright, which means the works can be used without acquiring permission or paying a fee.

article thumbnail

[Guest post] Can the owner of an artistic work convert it into an NFT for its use in the Metaverse?

The IPKat

Last week the media reported (see here ) that the Commercial Court Number 9 of Barcelona has issued a decision on the precautionary measures filed by VEGAP, the sole copyright collecting society which in Spain represents authors of artworks against the well-known Spanish fashion brand. We will have to wait until the final judgment is issued.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Who Owns the Copyright in AI-Generated Art?

Intepat

AI-generated art represents a fusion of human ingenuity in crafting algorithms and the machine’s ability to produce artworks autonomously. Copyright laws are designed to safeguard the rights of creators. Mario Klingemann’s AI Artworks : Mario Klingemann, a well-known AI artist, has produced various AI-generated artworks.

Art 105
article thumbnail

The puzzled tie of copyright, cultural heritage and public domain in Italian law: is the Vitruvian Man taking on unbalanced proportions?

Kluwer Copyright Blog

1] The artwork is held by the Italian state museum Gallerie dell’Accademia of Venice, which, along with the Italian Ministry of Culture, initiated the precautionary proceeding against the German company Ravensburger and its Italian subsidiary for producing and selling the puzzle and reproducing the work’s image. 633/1941, l.

article thumbnail

WIPIP Session 8 (copyright)

43(B)log

Wheaton is about no federal perpetual copyright, but it is also about what is common/public property as opposed to private property. The only mention in leg history of facts refers to the sweat of the brow doctrine. Karp agrees that (c) is not like land, which preexisted the public domain and was acquired and distributed by gov’t. (c)

article thumbnail

Clarifying Copyright Fair Use in Commercialized and Licensed Visual Arts: Insights from Warhol v. Goldsmith

LexBlog IP

Furthermore, the SCOTUS decision was influenced by the existence of a licensing agreement between Goldsmith and Vanity Fair, which permitted a one-time use of her photograph as an “artist reference for an illustration.” The pre-existing licensing agreement was also a significant aspect of this case.

article thumbnail

TM Scholars' Roundable: Session 1: The Relevance of Ornamentality in Trademark Law: Acquisition of Rights

43(B)log

Other IP rights: utility patent creates presumption of functionality; wonders about whether presence of non-TM IP protection for ornamental features—design patent, ©--might create a presumption of mere ornamentality w/o further evidence of source signification. artworks as TMs. Banksy failed to register a bunch of his?