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
Last week the European Commission published its proposal for a Data Act. But for anyone who had expected the Data Act to include a revision of the Database Directive — an ambition that the Commission had signalled in both the 2020 Data Strategy and the 2020 IntellectualProperty Action Plan — the final proposal will be a major disappointment.
This is a review of Guidebook to IntellectualProperty (seventh edition) authored by Sir Robin Jacob (8 New Square and UCL, Matthew Fisher (UCL) and Lynne Chave (UCL). A discount for IPkat readers has kindly been provided by the publisher, please see below for the code.
The IPKat has published several posts over the past two weeks! COPYRIGHT Katfriend Moritz Sutterer posted on a new competition tool that the German Competition Authority recently tried out against Google in relation to press publishers' neighbouring right.
Fast forward and see: The Database directive stands unchanged and there is still no clear evidence that the then-new intellectualpropertyright is an effective instrument. because there is no public access regime that applies, or because third parties own intellectualpropertyrights.
In addition, potential and tangible intersections between intellectualproperty and these trending topics were recently discussed by The Trademark Lawyer Magazine. In February, the Commission published its proposal for a " Data Act ", which in principle aims to revise the legal framework of Directive 96/9/EC.
As previously reported , between October 2021 and January 2022 the UK IntellectualProperty Office held a public consultation on the intersection between artificial intelligence (AI) and intellectualproperty laws (more specifically, copyright and patents). Photo by Kevin Ku on Unsplash. All-purpose TDM. by Edward J.
At the end of 2021, YouTube’s first Copyright Transparency Report 2021 (“Report”) was published. A vanishing right? The Sui Generis DatabaseRight and the proposed Data Act by Paul Keller. [T]he T]he European Commission published its proposal for a Data Act. 17 DSM Directive 2019/790 (“DSMD”). . by Edward J.
On 23 February 2022, the European Commission (EC) published a Proposal for a ‘Regulation on harmonised rules on fair access to and use of data (Data Act)’. The Institute acknowledges that the Data Act Proposal seeks to strike a balance between promoting access to and sharing of IoT data and protecting other conflicting rights.
In the beginning of April, the European Parliament published a report on AI in the Digital Age. In May 2022, the European Parliament published a study on IPRs and the impact on data access, portability and re-use. The international body representing authors and composers published its 2022 Annual Report. Read more here.
The first report of this project was published on 15 March 2023 (the “ Vallance Report ”), and the UK Government released its response (the “ Government’s Response ”) shortly after. labelling) on generated output to support right holders of copyrighted work. .”
The last source, scraping internet data, has been the most controversial so far and given rise to concerns from both intellectualproperty and data protection perspectives, and nascent litigation in various jurisdictions when the scraping has been done without permission of the copyright/databaseright holders.
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