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
The book that is going to change copyright law? Unlike the Swedish and German referrals, the Romanian one has not been made in the context of a dispute concerning works of applied art (which is refreshing), but rather in relation to the protectability of a critical edition of a work. Călinescu , C-649/23.
Like most copyright systems, French copyright law does not leave much room for the freedom of authors of transformative graphic works (also called “derivativeworks”). Three interesting cases on derivativeworks, two involving Jeff Koons and one Tintin, have recently put French copyright law in the international spotlight (e.g.
Beyond the obvious attempt to draw a connection between the artwork and the book based a shared sense of the "classical", the artwork also seeks to evoke a more specific connection with the contents of the book. You can't judge a book from its cover". True, except when a book and its cover are involved. But of course.
If so, infringement may occur unless an exception applies or the LLM did not have access to the original work. 1 Another key right is the creation of derivativeworks, which includes adaptations or translations. If so, infringement may occur unless an exception applies or the LLM did not have access to the original work.
One core concept in AI-relevant cases that both find for, and against, fair use ( Google Books and Fox v. It is somehow different from the right to make transformative derivativeworks (where the word “transformed” is used in Section 101 ) such as film adaptations of books, which clearly require copyright owner consent.
Fair uses tend to divide into buckets: justified by new work; justified by project. New work: Derivativework or embedding work: Cambpell v. Use is justified by context of being placed in new work. The parodic context has to remain for the work to remain a fair use.
The basic mechanism of the modern author is regulating reproduction of the work (the subject matter of copyright) and preventing affronts to the work and the author's connection with it (the subject matter of moralrights). In the word so favored by the Academy, "contextualization" matters.
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