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
Combine that “mastermind/dominant” author doctrine with the run of cases discussing ownership of software outputs (i.e., Copyright Office (the Office) when it comes to copyright ownership of artificial intelligence (AI) output. the “lion’s share” cases), and we see that the notion of what an “author” even is is highly nuanced.
A person is the owner of the copyright when they publish any creative work on social networking sites. Protecting the rights of copyright holders has been simpler when it comes to books, plays, theatres, and movies. However, as the internet has grown, it has become more challenging to safeguard copyrighted works.
Combine that “mastermind/dominant” author doctrine with the run of cases discussing ownership of software outputs (i.e., Copyright Office (the Office) when it comes to copyright ownership of artificial intelligence (AI) output. The Office has answered that question with a resounding “maybe.” ” U.S.
These rights are crucial for the development of innovation and intellectual creation. This will give recognition to those persons and provide them with ownership rights for that intellectual activity. That may include decentralized contentcreation platforms, IP registries on a blockchain, and smart contract licensing systems.
With the increasing reliance on technology and innovation, IP insurance has gained prominence as a vital tool for mitigating the risks that accompany intellectual property ownership and enforcement. It is especially relevant for media professionals and companies in advertising, publishing, or broadcasting.
From DVDs to OTT, the entertainment domain has come a long way owing to rapid digitalization affecting creative authorship over their creations [1]. Recent court decisions have clarified the scope of copyright in film screenplays, personality rights, and underlying works concerning contentcreation and licensing in broadcasting.
Creativity & Remuneration With , Between , & Via AI Agents Here, we envision that a new framework for contentcreation and exchange is emerging. In this AI-powered framework, content creators and users will interact via AI agents. The exchange of information will happen between and via AI agents.
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