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
By Dennis Crouch and Timothy Knight* The Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments on February 21 in an important copyright case – Warner Chappell Music v. The case now before the Supreme Court arose when Sherman Nealy’s collaborator licensed their co-created songs without Nealy’s permission (while Nealy was incarcerated).
Warner Chappell Music, Inc. Under the “discovery rule,” the limitations period begins to run when “the plaintiff discovers, or with duediligence should have discovered, the injury that forms the basis for the claim.” Warner Chappell Music, Inc. , to license works from the Music Specialist catalog.
Kelis has no legal ground to stand on but her quarrel with Beyoncé illuminates a prominent and recurring issue in the music industry. And when that man says, ‘Music has value,’ he means its value is beholden to men who had no part in creating it.”
During this period, Mr. Nealy was not involved in the music industry as he was serving a prison sentence. Meanwhile, Flo Rida’s song already gained significant popularity and was licensed for use in several popular television programs, including "So You Think You Can Dance.”
By Dennis Crouch and Timothy Knight On May 9, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Warner Chappell Music v. ” For those of you who have not been following the case, the Plaintiff Sherman Nealy, a music producer, helped create musical works in the 1980s with his collaborator, Tony Butler. .” Nealy , No.
A global audience of Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) explored how collective licensing can support SDOs as they meet customer needs today and into the future. In addition, for several decades and in many parts of the world, there has been a vibrant collective licensing model in operation for secondary rights.
In 1983, Sherman Nealy and Tony Butler formed a music label, Music Specialist Inc. Music Specialist), that recorded and released several singles, but their collaboration dissolved in 1986. In 2008, unbeknownst to Nealy, Butler entered into an agreement with Warner Chappell Music Inc. 1] The U.S.
With no hidden atrocities the labor intended to be associated with the innovation should be given their duediligence and the public can to emanate from the same. It must only include music, literary works like art, and much more. Unlike patents, trademark protection is held indefinitely.
Musician Sherman Nealy and his company, Music Specialist Inc. collectively, “Nealy”), sued Warner Chappell Music, Inc. (“Warner”), for copyright infringement in the Southern District of Florida, alleging that Warner was using Nealy’s musical works based on invalid third-party licenses in violation of 17 U.S.C. §
Under the “discovery rule,” the limitations period begins to run when “the plaintiff discovers, or with duediligence should have discovered, the injury that forms the basis for the claim.” In 2013 and 2015, it granted exclusive licenses to stream those works to Starz, a premium subscription channel. Petrella , 572 U.S.
It’s possible to create striking artistic images, music, poems and the like using Artificial Intelligence (AI) platforms so people naturally wonder who owns the rights in the output? Literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works are only protected by copyright if they are “original”. Is the output infringing copyright?
Copyright is a form of intellectual property law that protects original works of authorship, including literary, dramatic, musical, and specific intellectual works. Open Source material may seem safe and easy, but it has its licenses and restrictions. Licenses also play a pivotal role in this context.
Copyright is a form of intellectual property law that protects original works of authorship, including literary, dramatic, musical, and specific intellectual works. Open Source material may seem safe and easy, but it has its licenses and restrictions. Licenses also play a pivotal role in this context.
Similarly, a startup that owns copyrights to its original creative works, such as software, music, or literature, can license or sell those works, generating additional revenue streams. Investors and potential buyers often assess the IP portfolio of an emerging company as part of their duediligence process.
If you’re using an online logo generator, such as the one in Canva, a very popular online program for creating all kinds of visual projects, or Logo.com, you need to look at the license terms of the software. Canva and other logo generators are licensing the use of their product and the generated logos in it to you.
It can comprise of when a trademark was applied for first, registered or used in trade, when was a design/patent first licensed or assigned and so on. Further, it would also simplify duediligence required for IP transactions such as mergers and acquisitions.
It can comprise of when a trademark was applied for first, registered or used in trade, when was a design/patent first licensed or assigned and so on. Further, it would also simplify duediligence required for IP transactions such as mergers and acquisitions.
It can comprise of when a trademark was applied for first, registered or used in trade, when was a design/patent first licensed or assigned and so on. Further, it would also simplify duediligence required for IP transactions such as mergers and acquisitions.
The metaverse and virtual environments: Colloquial terms such as ‘metaverse,’ ‘web 3’ and ‘virtual environments’ will generally be accepted, although the latter is preferred due to its broad application to multiple contexts.
A non-fungible token is a one-of-a-kind digital token that may be linked to another item or asset, often a digital work, such as a drawing, video or piece of music. Alternatively, IP owners may want to license their IP specifically for use in NFTs to generate additional revenue and goodwill in the IP. This system is not foolproof.
From terminating allegedly infringing users and implementing copyright filters, to duediligence, website blocking, and running a search engine, tech companies can find themselves being held responsible when third parties upset the business models of other third parties. Sony Music certainly hopes that will be enough.
DSA improvements on Ecommerce directive: new, clarified and linked to duediligence obligations. Liability exemptions are independent of a full set of duediligence obligations. This is the major DSA regulatory contribution—splitting duediligence from liability for third party content.
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